WhiteRoseKillie Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Dingdong as hard as it is to disagree with this line im going to make an attempt at it. My point yesterday that the whole thing stems from Primary school isnt in the fact that its bigoted to provide faith schools, my point is that the segregation at that young age drives the bigoted view that the other side are different and not to be liked. A very large percentage of a Catholic school will support Celtic and grow up not really knowing Rangers/Protestant minded people and end up having the inevitable battles with the nearby non catholic schools. From a personal point of view I went to Catholic schools for 13 years and only ever met a handful of Rangers fans, and it was not until i went to Uni/Started working that i began to meet Rangers minded people on a more regular basis. My Primary School was around 1000 metres from my home and in between my home and School was the local Prody School and I tell you I could have beaten Usain Bolt in those days trying to get past it without getting my compulsary Catholic boy beating. Naturally, I grew up with a bigoted view of protestants and Rangers and will admit that during my teenage years and early twenties, I was one of the people we are talking about here, singing awful songs and hating people i didnt even know. However, once I started getting out in life and meeting other types of people this view starting disappearing and now at 30 years old, I wouldnt dream of singing the nonsense. I would be happy to predict that a high percentage of the nonsense comes from younger fans who are yet to really experience the other side. This is why I completely believe that the schooling system plays a massive part in the whole thing, if kids were grouped together at an early age i dont think the problem would be anywhere near as bad. P.S i also quit teaching because I had to satisfy a religous certificate, which i felt was a complete nonsense. Hopefully if people dont agree with my view then you can at least see where it comes from. And there you have the root cause of the Divide - raw ignorance. No real, practising Christian of any denomination would see another as following another religion. The vast majority of the arseholes who rant about the problems caused by religion never darken a church door outside of sevices for hatches, matches and dispatches. My own mother, by contrast, as devout a Catholic as you'll find, saw nothing wrong if, when on Holiday or otherwise away from home, in attending whatever service was available on a Sunday if she couldn't find a local RC church. "They do a couple of bits different, but I'm sure God understands" was her take on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingdong1929 Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Huh, managed to greeny you there WRK... was a mistake, but I agree much of bigotry is borne of ignorance. None of the 'proper' church-goers I know are sectarian bigots (though some church-goers likely are), just the arseholes that are. So you can keep your greeny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daydream Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Does anyone know how many rangers fans are banned then? Anyone? 1690 imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Does anyone know how many rangers fans are banned then? Anyone? I'm sure no.8 has said it's hundreds, if not 1000+. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killiesince1969 Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Scottish politicians, football authorities, football clubs, police and media had the opportunity in the summer of 2012 to kill sectarianism for ever, by making sure that Rangers stayed dead. As we know very well, they all panicked about 'Armageddon' and stood shoulder-to-shoulder with the bigots. The prospect of Celtic-Rangers freak shows (they're not paying for the quality of the football) was attractive to sponsors and the media and the needs of other fans/ domestic abuse victims/ A & E wards/ householders whose gardens get urinated in and littered with empty Buckfast bottles when the bigots come to town, were quietly ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7-2 Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 I'm sure no.8 has said it's hundreds, if not 1000+. Three it is then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weejoeharper Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Agree with 'my team Scotland' However my main objections to faith schools is that religious faith is fucking nonsense. We'd be better served having schools based on the hogwarts model. At least wizards treat women equally, don't appear to be homophobic or have a predilection for abusing small boys. Some muggle tolerance issues though. At last some sense! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Addie Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 I found this via Facebook today. I had a chuckle thinking it was satire at first, then I realised.... http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk/article.php?i=44&a=a-warning-to-all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weejoeharper Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 This is interesting: http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/nil-mouth-tells-spfl-never-5223863 Never mind bringing booze back to football and start stamping out the bigotryDon't you just love it when everything just starts to fall into place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Does anyone know how many rangers fans are banned then? Anyone? Not sure of numbers but the banned ones are mostly kafflick or mooslum apparently... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dorlomin Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Roughly. Sectarianism: hating someone because of their religion. Bigotry: hating someone because of a wider group they belong too rather than a specific attribute of the person. How often do you hear Martin Luther's 95 thesis cited as a reason to hate Catholics? How often do you hear Holy Scripture quoting the Christ, Jesus and his instruction that his church was to be built on St Peter as a reason to hate those who reject St Peter's heir? I have said many times this is very little to do with religion. In the 20s or even the 50s almost every Scot attended Kirk or Chapel and held their faith in the Nicene Creed to be as deer to them as life. They believed in redemption through the Blood of the Lamb and that their sins would be forgiven and they would enter the life eternal. How many of the neds hurling abuse at each other really believe that or are motived by it? Instead we see flags, nationalistic songs and praise of one ethnic group over another. It strikes me very strongly that this is about ethno-nationalism where religion is a means of identifying ethno-nationalist identity than about religion. There is nothing controversial in saying that many wars were about nationalism or ethno-nationalism and religion was used as a means of division rather than being religious wars (the many post Yugoslavian wars, the post reformation English French wars etc). My thoughts, dividing children by religion also divides them by an identity that becomes an ethnicity "I am Irish Catholic!". "I am proudly British Protestant!" The gruesome two some attract these groups. Misidentifying the problem creates false solutions. No one is beating up anyone because they reject the sacrament of confession. They are engages in a war between two artificially created groups that adopt "ethnicities" or tribalisms. To deal with the problem from a footballing perspective you have to create rules a little more water tight than "ban secterianism!!!1!!!" or "ban Bigots!!1!!1!", you will fail to ban much that you thought you had and end up having to deal with all manner of problems you have not thought off. As I have said in the past, football grounds are private property, you enter private property on the license conditions of the owners. Those license conditions are also governed by the competition orginisers. Ban songs or chants (in the middle songs) that support violent extra-state groups (so the Provos, the UVA etc). Ban songs that express intolerance towards to encourage hatred of religions or ethnicities. Live with "Britnat" or Irish nationalist songs because it would be near impossible to ban them with wording that complies with the ECHR and does not become oppressive. One thing. Every football fan every expressing an opinion on this matter should make clear that it should never be acceptable to ban footballing politics from a stadium. NEVER. Just make sure when expressing this kind of stuff this is clear. We should always be free to express discontent with boards, FA's etc in the stadium. (provided it does not transgress family friendly language). Football has moved on from the 70s as has Scotland. I dont mind seeing people call for crackdowns on out dated attitudes and behaviour. But this should not be an excuse for politicians to draft laws that prevent vigorous discourse on contentious issues outside of stadiums, prevent politics fom being expressed because you find it unpleasant and just generally stupid laws lashing out at ill defined targets. These are some of my opinions, your mileage may vary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 This isn't about actual sectarian or bigoted attitudes, it's not about faith schools, upbringing or discrimination. This is about effectively removing overt displays of unacceptable attitudes from our game and making sure we are presenting as positive an image of Scottish football as possible. If therangers fans sang The Bear Necessities or We're Happy and We Know it for 90 minutes every game anyone who held prejudiced beliefs when they sang the Billy Boys would still have those beliefs while they sang the Disney back catalogue. This is about removing football as an outlet for these backwards and offensive attitudes. As far as I know there have already been plentiful definitions of what is and what is not acceptable. What with the 21 point SPFL action plan and all the hard work that your club/company has undertaken to inform it's customers which of the classic numbers are verboten. Am I wrong? Has this not happened? Is the therangers fanbase in any doubt what they shouldn't be singing? Are you telling me that the club/company hasn't actually done everything in it's power to eradicate this? Shocking and incriminating if true. I don't see the clamour for new laws, definitions and legislation. I see our governing bodies being forced into ratifying more effective sanctions against those who breach the already well defined rules repeatedly and simply will not learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 Roughly. Sectarianism: hating someone because of their religion. Bigotry: hating someone because of a wider group they belong too rather than a specific attribute of the person. How often do you hear Martin Luther's 95 thesis cited as a reason to hate Catholics? How often do you hear Holy Scripture quoting the Christ, Jesus and his instruction that his church was to be built on St Peter as a reason to hate those who reject St Peter's heir? I have said many times this is very little to do with religion. In the 20s or even the 50s almost every Scot attended Kirk or Chapel and held their faith in the Nicene Creed to be as deer to them as life. They believed in redemption through the Blood of the Lamb and that their sins would be forgiven and they would enter the life eternal. How many of the neds hurling abuse at each other really believe that or are motived by it? Instead we see flags, nationalistic songs and praise of one ethnic group over another. It strikes me very strongly that this is about ethno-nationalism where religion is a means of identifying ethno-nationalist identity than about religion. There is nothing controversial in saying that many wars were about nationalism or ethno-nationalism and religion was used as a means of division rather than being religious wars (the many post Yugoslavian wars, the post reformation English French wars etc). My thoughts, dividing children by religion also divides them by an identity that becomes an ethnicity "I am Irish Catholic!". "I am proudly British Protestant!" The gruesome two some attract these groups. Misidentifying the problem creates false solutions. No one is beating up anyone because they reject the sacrament of confession. They are engages in a war between two artificially created groups that adopt "ethnicities" or tribalisms. To deal with the problem from a footballing perspective you have to create rules a little more water tight than "ban secterianism!!!1!!!" or "ban Bigots!!1!!1!", you will fail to ban much that you thought you had and end up having to deal with all manner of problems you have not thought off. As I have said in the past, football grounds are private property, you enter private property on the license conditions of the owners. Those license conditions are also governed by the competition orginisers. Ban songs or chants (in the middle songs) that support violent extra-state groups (so the Provos, the UVA etc). Ban songs that express intolerance towards to encourage hatred of religions or ethnicities. Live with "Britnat" or Irish nationalist songs because it would be near impossible to ban them with wording that complies with the ECHR and does not become oppressive. One thing. Every football fan every expressing an opinion on this matter should make clear that it should never be acceptable to ban footballing politics from a stadium. NEVER. Just make sure when expressing this kind of stuff this is clear. We should always be free to express discontent with boards, FA's etc in the stadium. (provided it does not transgress family friendly language). Football has moved on from the 70s as has Scotland. I dont mind seeing people call for crackdowns on out dated attitudes and behaviour. But this should not be an excuse for politicians to draft laws that prevent vigorous discourse on contentious issues outside of stadiums, prevent politics fom being expressed because you find it unpleasant and just generally stupid laws lashing out at ill defined targets. These are some of my opinions, your mileage may vary. Roughly? You mean wrongly, surely. Firstly, the meaning of sectarianism just might have something to do with the first four letters of the word. As I've pointed out on numerous occasions, those on both sides of the Divide claim to follow the same religion - Christianity. A religion based, ironically, on love and forgiveness. Secondly, why introduce the word "hate"? Bigotry, at bottom, is a negative perception or treatment of a group due to one or more defining characteristics. Using emptive language doesn't help a logical argument. Do carry on pouring petrol on the fire, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingdong1929 Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 I thought Dorlomin's was quite a good post actually... I'm still not sure if you feel more needs to be done to stamp out those chants that are more obviously unacceptable to the majority, Dorlomin, but otherwise I thought there were some good takes on the wider issue. Apologies for my part in the focus of this ending up on religion, sectarianism and faith schools. I said earlier in the thread I'd rather it look more at bigotry in general, as per the OP. But it took me a lot longer to get done with the faith school issue than I expected. My general take is that I'd still like to see the option of punitive measures against the club being brought in for 'extreme' chants etc. That's not an anti-OF thing. I've heard some racist shouts at County that fucked me off, if any of our fans were ever stupid to get a racist chant going, I'd be quite accepting of any resultant punishment. I'd like to think that wouldn't happen, and that these p***ks will remain pretty isolated with their inappropriate shouts, but I imagine it would be even less likely to happen if the club could be affected by it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 I thought Dorlomin's was quite a good post actually... I'm still not sure if you feel more needs to be done to stamp out those chants that are more obviously unacceptable to the majority, Dorlomin, but otherwise I thought there were some good takes on the wider issue. Apologies for my part in the focus of this ending up on religion, sectarianism and faith schools. I said earlier in the thread I'd rather it look more at bigotry in general, as per the OP. But it took me a lot longer to get done with the faith school issue than I expected. My general take is that I'd still like to see the option of punitive measures against the club being brought in for 'extreme' chants etc. That's not an anti-OF thing. I've heard some racist shouts at County that fucked me off, if any of our fans were ever stupid to get a racist chant going, I'd be quite accepting of any resultant punishment. I'd like to think that wouldn't happen, and that these p***ks will remain pretty isolated with their inappropriate shouts, but I imagine it would be even less likely to happen if the club could be affected by it? He made some good points, but started with a completely erroneous, although commonly used, statement. He then misdefined bigotry in a way that made it emotive - not a good idea if we want to make logical arguments as to how to eradicate the problem. You only have to look at any debate, on here or elsewhere - the whole thing goes off-track when emotion gets involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BStoFYI Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 In general, yes, but for this vote Labour MPs abstained anyway. So he wouldn't have voted anyway. I would have thought, given the Blairite accusations thrown at him and the hard job he has on to turn the electorate-survey results around, he would at least be present at the vote to try and reinforce the impression he is taking big issues like fracking seriously. That he didn't turn up at all was a bit surprising, albeit he maybe didn't want to have to answer hard questions. That he didn't turn up so he could throw some photos around of him playing with a football was more surprising, it didnt create a good impression in a lot of quarters. But of much more relevance, I'm still not sure what the message of that photo-op was, other than "I'm Jim, I like football, I'm just like you". Which was the main point I was trying to make. Bit of a detour from the thread, so apologies for that What's your position on fracking? I am not fussed either way, its bad for the environment maybe but not any worse than other stuff humans do, probably better than nuclear how should he vote to get your vote? fracking will probably help the average person so I would support it on that basis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BStoFYI Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 You started well. Most of the rest of your post was utter drek so I've not quoted it. I'd still be interested in feedback from posters on here who are brave enough to to draw the line between acceptable/unacceptable chants and for whom "It's nothing to do with football" is a shite reply. Ok you want it. Lets say this any songs with the add on "up the ra" should be banned if that add on is added on. Fields of athenrye without add ons is a love song and slightly left leaning song rather than a song about specifically irish issues and so does not really verge into offensively political. Roll of honour should be banned as its about the new IRA not the 1900's version. The solider song without add ons is fine, god save the queen like wise (though I actually don't like the borderline racist sentiment in both songs, same as the borderline racist sentiment in flower of scotland but then I am a wishy washy liberal, but one who doesn't try to impose every view of mine onto others the lines I refer to is one line about anglos near the end of soldier song, one line about rebellious scots and the line "prince edwards army" which is anti English arguably). Songs calling a whole clubs supporters paedophiles should be banned, songs about the specific individuals who actually where convicted of under-age (this still means the "one of your own" chant is banned) sex offences shouldn't as they are not guilty of the bigotry of generalizing unfairly beyond the person who did the crime. ****** and *** probably should be banned even though *** refers to Attila the *** not protestants. The sash should be banned. Any song about northern Ireland that is no derogatory to Catholics, unionists,protestants, republicans or promoting uva or ira etc should be OK. So singing something like "Ireland should never be united/ireland should be united" is ok. Songs allowed are GSTQ, Soldier song, Fields of athenrye, the bouncy, walk on, penny arcade, any song not promoting uva or ira etc but which may promote lines like "I am a proud ulster scott" or "I am a proud republican" no lines dissing the other side should be allowed, be proud of who you are not proud to hate the other side. The fact a minority of bigots will hate unionist ulster scots and people singing the soldier song says more about them than the people singing the non sectarian political songs which don't promote terror groups. Saying F the pope or F the queen should be banned. Songs saying F religion or F atheism etc should be banned. I think thats a lot for starters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neutralfan80 Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 The best fans in the world! A quote from the bbc "The club won't challenge the charge for setting off fireworks. It is the sixth time in three years that Celtic have been charged over supporter behaviour." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BStoFYI Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 So, is it OK to sing most of Celtic pedophiles? As long as we don't claim it's all of them? Lol dude you know "most" isn't true either. Nope It can only be each individual actually convicted of a crime involving under age girls or boys. I don't even think people should sing about teachers at say hearts or celtic done for having sex with their overage (16-18) but in their care pupil as pedo's purely from a pedants point of view. Perverts maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsforlife Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 It's quite simple, as long as we have two clubs that openly encourage fans of a particular political/religious persuasion to support them then the problem will remain in football, it's natural for football fans to show both sides of the coin in their support, your not going to get fans to not sing negative songs about their rivals, and if a club sets it's self up to be of one persuasion then the fans will naturally sing about the other. You need to boot the arse out of the very core of the problem start demanding they become truly politically neutral. As a societal issue I don't think it's that bad, criticism over politics/ religion is perfectly valid, it's as acceptable to call someone a catholic c**t(for example) as it is to say ukip are wankers. You have ridiculous beliefs you deserve to be attacked, but let's keep it out of our football grounds, clubs are meant to be for all, not those of a particular belief, Celtic and rangers have failed at this all since day 1, time for us to say no more, but the authority's won't even condemn slight indiscretions, never mind actually going deeper into the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.