Careful now
Posted on
November 04, 2013 by
Rev. Stuart Campbell
In reference to this article we ran on Saturday, here’s (courtesy of several alert viewers) a timely piece from this week’s Scottish Catholic Observer.
Click the image to read it at full size.
‘perhaps I’m paranoid’
You certainly are, pure and utter drivel.
Sorry but couldn’t get past the first paragraph as soon as he mentioned braveheart I switched off – when will they learn.
I am saddened by his ‘historical’ reasons for voting ‘NO’. His references to ‘Homosexual Marriages’ are from another era too. Given his many references to Ireland, perhaps he has settled in the wrong Country.
I’m with Annie, as soon as Braveheart was mentioned, I stopped reading.
Basically he’s voting no because he’s against marriage between people of the same sex, so he’s in the same camp as some of the more extremist Protestants. Even Father Ted had more liberal attitudes than that.
So he doesn’t like the way things are and will be voting to keep them that way? What a tit.
Aye, as soon as the Braveheart reference appeared I skipped to the end to be encountered by the Homosexual Marriages part, as mentioned by BMC875. Sigh…
Although I did catch the “I´m paranoid” statement too and, yet again, I though exactly the same as Baheid thought.
“I’m with Annie, as soon as Braveheart was mentioned, I stopped reading.”
Same here. Life’s too short.
You’d think he wanted to live another century oh..hold on
There shouldn’t be separate school imo. Then you wouldn’t get the ‘What school did you go to’ etc etc crap. I can’t believe they still exist, in this day and age they create a lot of the ignorance and bigotry, not protect anyone from it.
We, in Scotland, are looking towards the future and what we can do whilst he seems stuck in a past, and writes a piece apologising for being so?
As for naming his son, Wille, Tommy and James seem good enough to me?
The man never really has left Ireland and arguably really does not want to be Scottish? Does he really prefer to be British, instead?
I find it very hard to have sympathy for someone who doesn’t want to be discriminated against, although wants to return to a time when he could discriminate against me.
He is basing his vote on what?
Ach, 63 years old and set in his ways. The question is – what’s the editor thinking?
Ps, William Wallace (aka the “Hollywood Braveheart”) and Robert Bruce (the original man termed Braveheart) would have been Catholic, so if he´s going to reference Braveheart, *rolls eyes*, then what´s his beef with them?
Oh my, I just mentioned Braveheart in my second Wings comment after not commenting for a while here. I´m off to look up the meaning of cliché again…
This drivel might as well have been ghost written by George Galloway in preparation of his ‘Naw Tour’.
“Perhaps I am paranoid and speak as a 63 year old of yesterday’s generation”… yup, spot on there mate!
To Hugh Dougherty : (Who?) Fearmongering at its absolute best and smug with it smacks of a pre agenda before you read it.
AS Obsession with Scottish people?
Born in Scotland (but not Scottish) is this Margret Curran (?)
Blah, Blah, Blah di blah, blah, blah, waffle waffle – Oh I’m voting No, as an Irish Heritage Catholic living in Scotland but not a member of any poilitical party.
Definitely not Labour then.
And all these bad things happend as being part of Britain, but Im happy to stick with the tainted system that caused me hardship and discrimination and cant look to an aspirational future cause its Scottish and British.
Dear, dear me. I leave this one to Scottish Catholics to disect as it sounds like the catholic press have same drivers as MSM & BBC Scotland. Paul Sinclair invovled?
Sorry this guys lost on me, but then Im not religious and lost interest in this rubbish 1/2 way through. Very sad and spiteful view of opportunity of a lifeteime.
Usualy when I see reference to “Braveheart” in an article, I assume that the writer is either 1) ignorant, 2) biggotted beyond hope or simply 3) parrotting Unionist propaganda. I therefore read no further.
In this case I thought I would give him the benefit of the doubt and read through to the end.
I was right in my first impression. Probably all three.
“… shows what the post-2014 Scotland could be like.” Yes, a place where we strive to create a society were we are all more equal. Given the oppression etc. that he wrote about you would think that would be a good thing? Apparently not.
What angers me is he is exactly the type who helps divide his own community to ‘protect it’, not the community of his town or village but ‘his people’ within that community. What a hypocrite. The only thing this muppet is protecting is his own prejudices of which he admits in this piece, are many.
None so blind as those who will not see…
Here is a man stuck in the past. There is no room for anyone in Scotland who stick to past ideals to create division.
@Conan;
I think his photo’s in my Panini Espania 82 sticker album.
Hugh Dougherty, ex-Senior Public Relations Officer at East Renfrewshire Council; previously Education Press Officer at Strathclyde Regional Council. Son Hugh Jr was a journalist with The Daily Mail and now News Editor of the Sunday Telegraph…
… of course it’s an emotional write-up from Hugh snr, politics don’t come into it. :/
Dcanmore
Thanks, he is a SLab apparatchik
I wonder if this article is of the Marcus Gardham school of journalism, and BBC SCOTLAND News cultural conformity unwritten guidelines.
Print what the Editor wants and then trouser the cheque.
Job done.
At first I thought it was Michael Knight (Kight rider)
– but then I realised it was the car that spoke like an Automaton.
Religion has nothing to do with independence as far as I am concerned, apart from ensuring the right to worship as you wish, I fail to see the reverence.
This is no more than a shitstirring article, the author does not say what the alternative to voting YES would produce, infact its very hard to actually figure out what this article means, apart from vote NO or BOO.
People should not try to scare people by using their religion, it is an unworthy action.
@Dcanmore
Ahhhh; no political affiliation then
I can only think of the Rev I M Jolly, reading how this poor man feels.
I guess the majority of contributors and readers of this site cannot wait until the time we can return our country to her rightful place as an independent nation. We will prosper.
Did anybody get any further than “Braveheart-inspired” before binning this drivel?
How many times have I heard this rubbish. Divide and rule tactics.
Never mind Dougherty can sit down with his pals in the orange order and plan how they are going to thwart those pesky nats with their faces painted blue.
I’ve got an Irish background as well,I’ve even got an Irish passport ,certainly feel a lot more relaxed than I did with the British one. However I’m Scottish ,I’ll return my Irish passport with a letter of thanks when I can get my Scottish one. Dougherty on the other hand is British and a unionist. He has more in common with those Orangemen who protest against independence than he does with me.
yeah, obviously no ties with Labour…
link to paisleydailyexpress.co.uk
‘ Why I’m worried about the future’
Lot’s of folk on Rangers forums have posted similar in the past year or two.
Funny that a lot of of folk from the tribal divide are staunch Unionists?
Well. That was racist, sectarian and clear – and ironic.
This man will be voting ‘No’ which I’d imagine would embolden those people whom he believes would oppress him. Strange bedfellows.
Ok shuggy we’ll take our independence and you can apply to rejoin the Great British empire, and good luck!
I’m struggling a litte how a post-No UK will be any more aligned to Catholic , or indeed, any religions values. I am proud that Scotland welcomes anyone who does us the honour of choosing to live here – no matter which religious, demographic or origin.
He has more in common with those Orangemen who protest against independence than he does with me.
This is it though, Britain cultivated the sectarianism, the last vestiges of which wear 80’s haircuts.
I wonder what he thinks happens tomorrow night all over his beloved UK.
I didn’t know what it was ’til my teens but I’m not catholic.
I also jumped to the last paragraph when I hit ‘Braveheart’… what uneducated drivel. Seriously messed up… just like his hairdo!
@Papadocx;
“Shuggy”
Could you extrapolate?
Scottish Catholic Observer is edited by former Scotsman journalist Liz Leydon who took over the position in 2008. The website says it has a weekly readership of 50,000, meaning it probably has a distribution of around 25,000.
Yes the homophobic under current towards the end of the article is classic hypocrisy.
“Here [Australia] you are just accepted for what you are!”
Aboriginals would testify to that. Historical abuse of Aboriginals aside, their life still seems second rate “rubbish” and maybe even not worth living for many.
The entire content of the comment / article is pretty poor in my opinion. It seems to have no depth of thought to it whatsoever.
A completely disingenuous piece.
Those aren’t his reasons for voting no.
Once again – nothing in my personal experience has prepared me to understand this guy’s worldview.
Yo, Scottish Catholic peeps – I don’t have animosity to you, and I think of you as just as Scottish as I am.
I meant to say, that’s the newspaper readership not the website.
What ignorant tripe Dougherty writes.
He says that maybe he is being paranoid but I think he is really being disingenuous.
He implies throughout his piece that somehow Catholics would be disadvantaged in an independent Scotland yet can produce absolutely no evidence to substantiate his assertions.
In any event the referendum is about whether or not Scotland should become an independent nation again and not a vote for the SNP.
Is he also saying that if Labour win the first Scottish general election in 2016 that they would also be anti-Catholic?
Historically it is the British state that is to blame for the remaining tensions that exist between Protestants and Catholics in Scotland.
It wouldn’t exist if Westminster hadn’t stirred up hate as part of its machiavellian shenanigans to keep the Catholics “in their place” as it saw it, in Ireland and West Central Scotland.
To use progress in the way minorities such as gays are treated in Scots society as a political football is also utterly despicable especially coming from someone purporting to be a Christian.
Can anyone define “shuggy”?
Atypical-scot
parochial endearment for Hugh.
Someone should tell Hugh Dougherty it is not 1932 any more. We’ve got the Internet.
(Also, he will be pleased to hear that my Protestant cousin recently had his kid baptised a Catholic, to please the child’s mother – one wee anecdote from real life to balance his preferred anti-Catholic anecdotes).
Living in the east of Scotland and working part of the year in Ireland, I would say that just about none of the Irish Catholics I meet have any desire at all for their country to be part of the United Kingdom ruled from London.
Can anyone explain why Irish catholics in Glasgow seem to have the exact opposite opinion?
This man is not representative of the Irish diaspora; in fact I would say he’s as big a bigot as those he is accusing. My father was Catholic and proud of his heritage, part of which was Irish, but he was an even prouder Scot and he wanted an independent Scotland not because of any attitudes or bigotry encountered in the past but because he believed that an independent Scotland would be a fairer, better and more hopeful country for future generations where these past divisions would slowly but certainly disappear.
@Papadocx;
Cheers, never heard of it, strangely unavailable in google search. Is it Scottish, or Irish?
He actually used the phrase “mixed marriage”? I despair.
My mother was from Angus. She was an episcopalian and supported DFC. My Father was from Perthshire. He was a presbyterian and favoured Dundee United. Mum believed in astrology. Dad didn’t.
Clearly, I’m a mestizo or, perhaps, a half-caste…
Well, I read all the way to the end. I didn’t think it could get worse than “what [the SNP] portrays as the 700th anniversary of the English defeat at Bannockburn”, but I’m sorry to say it did.
Sadly, Dougherty’s sectarian views are still all too common in today’s Scotland. If you search for bluetooth devices in my workplace, you’ll find one called ‘Unrepentant Fenian Bastard’. The owner of that phone doesn’t vote in elections because Sinn Fein doesn’t stand in Scotland.
Atypical_Scot says: Can anyone define “shuggy”?
Is he the skinny one that has the munchies all the time in the Scottish version of Scooby-Doo?
Shug has (as far as i remember) always been a Scottish variation/nickname of Hugh.
Like Dode is for George
Well that’s one who doesn’t believe in the forgiveness of sins.
The Kirk condemnation of 1932, appologised for in 2002 is still a reason to vote No in 2014?
The muscular “Scottishness” of Compton Mackenzie, MacDairmid and Wendy Wood that died with them and was no part of the SNP after it became a political party in the 60s is reason to vote No in 2014?
Scottish governments, Yes and No, that have worked to make life better for all in Scotland and have even promoted laws against sectarianism are insufficient to consider Yes in 2014?
Even the fact that a No vote alligns himself with a Westminster Government that also is promoting his loathed “homosexual marriage” is no cause to sway his allegiance to that selfsame Westminster system that forced the Irish Catholics out of Ireland in the first place and then, in the second, did nothing to alleviate the sectarian treatment that they received when they got to the UK is not enough to consider that a Yes vote might lead to something better.
His attitude reminds me of those pictures of maltreated dogs grovelling in fear in front of their rescuers because they are unable to think that their new humans might be nice. Shame really.
Hugh Dougherty
You’re a clown. To even debate this …is to open the debate on religion. Shame on you, mate!
Anyone who brings religion into the debate on the referendum; seriously …have a word with yourself.
The referendum is about giving Scotland choices; choices to make our future a better one, and to make sure ALL Scottish kids have a bright and happy future, irrespective of their religion.
One should not be sitting and wondering if we are looking at a new Calvinist era in Scotland. WE ARE NOT!
Calvinism had its day. People are more enlightened, and much more compassionate than even thirty years ago. We will not be returning to 19th Century Scotland, and most certainly NOT late 20th century Northern Ireland.
I denounce anyone UTTERLY if they bring religion into any part of this debate, and Hugh Dougherty …you fall into this category. You should be ashamed of yourself.
You know, although of course I totally disagree with their opinion, I have more time for those of the NO persuasion who at least tell folk that they disagree with the YES campaign, have never been nationalist minded etc, so long as they are honest about it, than I do with those like this fella, who try to dress it up as something else.
It takes some kind of brass neck to give the impression that you genuinely feel threatened by an idea who’s time has come, by insulting all of those who support the idea, and by using the kind of rhetoric usually associated by those who over the years have persecuted others including catholics.
It’s a shame he didn’t remind his readers of the criticism the Labour party in particular received from leaders of the Catholic Church not so long ago!
What I particularly detest about this type of article is that it reminds me of one of those letters or posts from unionists who attack the SNP but don’t have the guts to say openly what political party it is that they support!
Danny, well said, a Scot of Irish heritage and proud to acknowledge both facts. This article by Hugh Dougherty is a sad indictment on those who, like Curran, Murphy, and most of the Labour MPs elected from Scotland, seem to regard the SNP as some kind of bastion of an outdated and very wrong 1930s anti-Irish Catholic prejudice, promulgated by the then Kirk.
I freely admit that since the Union of 1706/1707, Scotland joined all too enthusiastically in England’s military and cultural oppression of Ireland. Even before that, after James VI King of Scots became King of England too in 1603, he gave his royal backing to the “plantation” of troublesome Scottish (and some English) borderers over to Ulster. This was deliberately done to create an ethnically and religious *buffer state* between the mainly Catholic native Irish, who were disposessed of their land, and a new Protestant “British” landowning population. It worked only too well, producing the likes of the bigoted, loud-mouthed Paisley and his po-faced Orange Order adherents in the current Unionist Parties of Northern Ireland.
However, for this man Dougherty to equate Alex Salmond’s vision of an independent Scotland to the historically rubbish Braveheart film, is not just laughable and inaccurate, it is also verging on siding with Lamont’s hate-filled Labour Party bile against the SNP, the First Minister and Scottish independence. Dougherty, like Billy Connolly, is no doubt justifiably proud of his Irish ancestors successful fight to regain Ireland’s independence after 900 years of mainly English and latterly British oppression. So why do these two in particular now feel the need to talk Scotland down, and uphold the Westminster rule that their Irish forefathers rejected? Payback time, maybe? Surely not?
@Ellie;
Does he not come across as an Irishman in Scotland rather than Scottish? Perhaps a symptom of the perpetual bigotry he experienced, and judging by his picture, he stopped (if he ever started) considering being Scottish about 30 years ago?
It’s like a 60+ year old blacksmith I used to work with, you could chat away with him, but when you put forward any argument the world had changed since 1980, you were met with either “yi Commie” or “yi poof”.
This chap may be being political, but that suggests there is a community completely closed to change to be political to, and in turn, the editor realizes the readership recognizes his arguments.
Q. What is the difference between George Galloway and Hugh Dougherty?
A. A fag paper.
Surely ‘shuggy’ means ‘Somewhat like a shug.’
Because this idiot makes a complete hash of history, for my own peace of mind I simply must demolish it.
I fear if Scotland does vote ‘yes’ to independence in 2014, given the Scottish National Party’s careful wooing of the ‘Catholic vote’ over recent years.
Political party attempts to attract voters? STOP THE BALLY PRESSES!
But I am uneasy about how I, fellow Catholics and members of the Irish diaspora, in particular, might fare in the brave new world of Alex Salmond’s, Scottish, with a very capital ‘S,’ Braveheart-inspired, Scotland.
This was the point I was ready to stop reading. How could Salmond’s campaign be “Braveheart-inspired” when he joined the Federation of Student Nationalists in 1973? Was Margot MacDonald “Braveheart-inspired”? Winnie Ewing? John McCormick? Hugh McDiarmid? Were all these people inspired by a Hollywood film? Come off it.
But let’s go on.
For the Scottish National Party, celebrating its 70th birthday in 2014, and, what it portrays as the 700th anniversary of the English defeat at Bannockburn by Scottish freedom fighter, Robert the Bruce, rather than a Norman French power struggle
They’re portraying it as a Scottish victory (why emphasise “English defeat” over “Scottish victory”?) by a Scottish freedom fighter because that’s what it was. Bruce had Gaelic ancestry and considered himself Scottish. The nobility and people of Scotland backed Robert the Bruce in too many sources to link to in this comment. That he was related to the nobility of England (including Edward himself) is irrelevant: half of Europe intermarried with foreign nobles for political gain. Has this fool never read the Declaration of Arbroath and how it explicitly says this NOT for power (nor riches or glory) but for freedom?
The wars of England and France were Norman French power struggles; the wars of Independence were invasions. If you can’t see the difference between the two…
Perhaps that is because the SNP’s founding in 1934 came at a painful period, just two years after the Church of Scotland’s notorious, 192 General Assembly deliverance, calling for all Irish to be sent home.
If it wasn’t already clear, we’re seeing another misleading “Independence=SNP” false dichotomy, blissfully ignoring the home rule/independence/nationalist movements predating the formation of the SNP – and indeed, predating even the 19th Century mass Irish Catholic influx.
Neither did the SNP historically ‘play well’ with the other members of the Scottish Catholic community – Italians, Poles and Lithuanians – which is why, recently, the party has striven to be seen to woo Catholic voters.
Because, of course, it couldn’t be that the SNP has changed and evolved over the past 70 YEARS, now could it? I’d be astounded if the SNP WEREN’T trying to woo Catholics.
Alex Salond’s obsession with “The Scottish People” concerns me, however. Almost daily, we hear ‘the Scottish People will decide,’ ‘the Scottish People’ excludes anyone not ‘Scottish,’ whatever that is. If the SNP could inclusively use the ‘Peoples of Scotland,’ or the ‘Scottish Community,’ I would be happier. But the current slogan smacks of an exclusive club.
… That’s the most ridiculous case of semantic stretching I’ve seen in quite a while. In what universe could you reasonably argue a distinction between “The Scottish People” with “Peoples of Scotland”? Is there a difference between “The American People” and “Peoples of America”? “The English People” and “Peoples of England”? What a stupid, needlessly divisive and inflammatory thing to say.
But, the Scottish Government has had to admit that sectarianism is a reality in Scotland and that the traffic is largely one-way towards Catholics.
And you’ll note that this Scottish government has started and supported many endeavours to tackle sectarianism, something which previous governments (Westminster and Holyrood) have neglected, and in some cases even fostered. Just look at Glasgow’s Labour Catholic councils and their antics.
So, what would a new, post-independence Scottishness be like? Would it be even narrower, drawing on the dourness of Calvinist Scotland?
This man hates sectarianism so much he snidely refers to Calvinism as “narrow” and “dour”?
And how would the Irish, Catholic diaspora be rewarded for not being exactly the best SNP supporters over the last 70 years?
Considering how Labour Catholics were “rewarded” over the last few decades, it’s hard to see how much worse it could be. This idea of punitive politics is self-destructive, petty, tribalist garbage, and has no place in any serious discussion. Which is why I have such issues with New Labour.
There are warnings, for example the dedication by the Scottish government to the cause of homosexual ‘marriage,’ sweeping Catholic opposition aside, shows what the post-independence landscape could be like.
Putting aside the comments about ‘homosexual ‘marriage”, Dougherty IS aware that ALL THE MAJOR PARTIES IN SCOTLAND are EQUALLY dedicated to the cause of marriage equality – as well as the major WESTMINSTER parties? This isn’t just a post-independence landscape, it’s the future of the UK as a whole. So if you’re seriously voting No because you oppose gay marriage in the UK, then it’s a pretty pathetically wasted vote.
So, I’ll be voting ‘No’ in 2014. And, just in case anyone thinks this is an attack on the SNP, I have never been a member of any political party, and, frankly, struggle to find one party whose moral and social policies chime with my Catholic conscience.
Because you can only attack a political party if you’re a member of one? All the criticisms of the SNP suddenly disappeared in a puff of smoke? And if you can’t find a single party that chimes with your Catholic conscience, what on earth maks you think that would change in the UK, where there is no feasible alternative to the Conservative-LibDem-Labour regime?
What a stupid, stupid article. My mother, die-hard Catholic, agrees (and she’s been SNP since she was 16).
This chap’s peddling fear. I can’t see anybody falling for it. I sure hope not.
This article is so ill informed that I feel like I need a shower after reading it….
I do not believe for one minute he was bullied or prejudiced against because of his “Irishness” ,or his Catholicism .
I reckon it was that Barnet what dun it!!!
I got passed the ‘Braveheart’ bit – only after a lengthy break to make a cuppa’ – then came back to read that 2014 is all about the SNP celebrating Bannockburn and then the Church of Scotland’s 1932 dodgy call to send Irish catholics back to Ireland, which somehow, by sheer insinuation, the author has tried to attribute that to the SNP way of thinking.
By that kind of rational, I presume the author also thinks that all Americans in the southern states still want slavery, that all Germans are Nazis and the earth is indeed flat.
As I said on Saturday, it’s all myth, and more importantly, it’s about keeping those myths alive and passing them on to the next generation so that they, who may never have been the victim of such abuse, can pretend that they have and hold an irrational grudge.
Heck, even the comments posted here can be used by such groups to ‘prove’ that their irrational fears are indeed real.
People say history is important, well in my mind many of those people tend to have an agenda, like this guy. If you want to truly change you have to dump your history and start again where we are all equal and responsible.
A typ
Hirsute and ugly?
Conan,
Have I something for him and you.
link to bluebeards-revenge.co.uk
Apart from the Braveheart reference, there is also the claim that the Scottish Wars of Independence were really a Norman French power struggle, and that is the SNP who see Bruce as a freedom fighter. What about Wallace, who was not Norman? What of the Declaration of Arbroath, one of the earliest known manifestations of a true national identity?
If an independent Scotland was likely to be more racist, to an extent that should worry people whose families came from a neighbouring country several generations ago, why would Humza Yousaf be part of a Scottish Government seeking to restore independence?
He quotes a case of a humanist who would not set foot in a Catholic church, or quite possibly in any church. This might be a bit extreme, but then if one is strongly opposed to religion then one might feel very uncomfortable in a place dedicated to religion. So what is this anecdote supposed to prove, other than that sometimes bottoms of barrels need to be scraped?
Perhaps Mr Dougherty should remember that the country of which he wants Scotland to remain part does not allow its head of state to be a Catholic, but does give Protestant bishops the right to sit in the House of Lords.
Dear Mr Dougherty,
Perhaps I can allay some of your fears. As you rightly point out the SG led by the SNP is in favour of Catholic schools, Papal visits and maintains good relations with Ireland, that things have moved on in your lifetime, so why the paranoia?
How does staying with the UK get around same sex marriage legislation? Why do you feel alienated by the term ‘Scottish’, and it’s rather disingenuous to claim that the SNP is promoting some sort of monoculture, you can’t seriously believe that, can you? I don’t do a tally of these utterances but I’m sure with a bit of digging I could find many ‘people of Scotland’, ‘Scottish community’ references you believe are absent from the debate. If they were up to what you suggest then we’d have 4th generation Prods from Fayetteville North Carolina being enfranchised.
On the other hand why doesn’t it bother you that there’s never been a Catholic PM at Westminster, that Mr T Blair didn’t dare come out about his conversion until after he left office. And of course there’s the Queen and family, of course I know we’re meant to be keeping them in an independent Scotland.
As for the liberal, tolerant Australians, remind me when did their white only immigration policy end? Have you been to Alice Springs and its surrounds, chatted to any of the indigenous locals?
Maybe you’re willling to reconsider but somehow I doubt it.
Hopefully some YES supporting genuine readers of the SCO will send you well thought out considered letters laying out why they see things differently.
Yours etc, etc
Funny how these muppets argue about Sectarianism in Scotland, but never notice that it happens as part of the Union. What price the protection of the union there?
The article is straight propaganda. Deliberately conflating unconnected historical events to spread the negative issues across to both e.g. the Church of Scotland 1932 Deliverance and the beginning of the SNP.
(There is attempts by Together to have all conflicting notions coming together in one Party. The SNP and Independence is a small insignificant entity with nothing going for it, and at the same time responsible for the persecution of Catholics, putting the security of the UK, and the effect of its massive presence in the world, and the security of the western world, all at risk.
But even taken at face value the article runs straight into the wall of unreason. All of what he writes about happened under the Union, the very situation he argues his readers to stay with. George Galloway uses the same argument.
Mr Dougherty, is correct he is being paranoid.
The west of Scotland is far more cosmopoliton than it was 30 years ago, with a multi-ethinictiy populus.
You cant judge Scotland today, with Scotland of the past, sure their is still sectarianism, but not at levels of bygone days.
Mr Dougherty, would do well to heed, the suffering that Westminster, is raining down on the poor and disabled right now, no matter what denomination you maybe.
Everyone in an independent Scotland would have a say in what direction Scots should go, can the same be said under Westminster rule, I think not.
As some have astutely pointed out, this man is probably ingeniously disingenuous. He has done pretty well out of the Union and fits the bill perfectly for a unionist, not on account of heritage or religion, but on self interest. Is he trying to identify with the oppressed and what will be best for them? Not very believable. You know, I always remember something a tutor of mine said years ago, about judges in Scotland (I high prestige job I’m sure most would agree). She said in her experience it didn’t matter whether they went to Catholic School or non-Denominational, they all seemed to have come from private school of one colour or the other.
I’m going to stick my neck out here: The comments so far have been really unhelpful. Say what you like about the article, it’s expressing a perception, and that perception needs to be countered, not dismissed – not least because it may be a perception which is widely-enough shared to make a difference in 2014.
Add in the contrary perception from the other camp that independence is a betrayal of queen, country and protestant unity, and there is a problem. And it’s a problem which carries a significant number of votes.
Quite how one sets about addressing that problem is much the same as asking how one addresses sectarianism. But one thing is clear – the happy cheerful vision of an independent Scotland is not reaching – maybe cannot reach – down to the level of instinctive fears and hatreds such as we see above.
That said, I think we’d do better to discuss how one can reach out – than dismiss this article as of no account.
My favourite bit is when he worries about the SNP’s use of “the scottish people” because he’s not sure what would make someone “Scottish enough”. Here, how about when Yes Scotland, Salmond, Sturgeon and everyone else defines it themselves as “anyone who lives here”? No? Too sectarian for you?
Tube.
@Conan;
Collecting those stickers was no laughing matter, perhaps the most the serious part of my educational years. I only wish I liked football as much as the insane drive I had for filling in the blank spaces. Still shit at hangman though:)
Why I’m Worried About The Future – we might get a no vote next year. And just about any religious person regardless of which religion should be too.
What a sad man.
So is that another newspaper that doesn’t support independence? Is there not a single newspaper in the galaxy that is sympathetic to Scottish independence? If a third of the population are yes voters why does not a single paper, radio or TV station chase their custom?
@kininvie
You may read it as expressing a perception. I read it as delberately creating a false perspective.
Kininvie – you’ve got a point, but some people simply aren’t going to be won over, and I would suggest the likes of Hugh are very much in that group. Far better to spend energies thinking how to get through to those who can be won over, rather than wasting time on those who will not see.
I’m not sure how you even get through to someone who puts marriage in quotation marks when referring to same-sex couples marrying. A closed mind there I think.
I look forward to the Scottish Catholic Observer publishing a comment on why a Scottish Catholic Yes voter is confident about the future.
Maybe they have already, as why wouldn’t they?
@Kininvie: I’m going to stick my neck out here: The comments so far have been really unhelpful. Say what you like about the article, it’s expressing a perception, and that perception needs to be countered, not dismissed
I tried. 🙁
O/T but i would like to hear the opinion of someone who brings forth some sense.
All those Labour folk suddenly calling for the reopening of the Falkirk enquiry or rather for a new one, maybe it’s me being a cynic where labour are concerned, but wouldn’t this just mean, that the contentious original one could be buried from site for good and a completely new one, suitable for all concerned, could be put in place, so that labour can put a new shiny face on for the Falkirk public?
Oh well, lets hope that if the police don’t take things forward AGAIN, that at least this time we will be told why in full!
Mr Dougherty,
Like you I am from the self same Catholic Irish heritage. UNLIKE you I welcome the opportunity an Independent Scotland will bring to the under priviliged , address child poverty banish weapons of mass destruction. You live in a country which is the 4th unequal in terms of wealth in the world. It is also the the fourth biggest spender on arms in the world – yet you advocate NO ?
@kinivie
As I said in my post I hope YES voters who genuinely read the SCO respond in its pages to the artice that’s the way in my view to deal with it. Then, hopefully the readers who do agree with his sentiment will see things differently. And for what it’s worth if he does really believe everything he says I doubt there are really that many who share his view, I may be wrong of course.
@Kininvie;
Sound ideal but are you suggesting the dyed in the wool old school are possibly open to change? If they are, it would only be from family trickle influence surely?
Ayes On The Prize – yes, 4th unequal, but who has done well? Top 5% and top 1%. I’d suspect with his salary he’d be in top 5%. No worries about inequality for him.
Coming from Aberdeen, where bring ‘fine’ is all that is used to judge a person, I resent the parts of his article where he states that Scotland is anti-Catholic. NOT IN MY SCOTLAND. The tone of this article is that he is not Scottish, he doesn’t want to be Scottish and he does not like being in Scotland. His best solution is to work out what he wants and do something to effect his desired outcome.
I get the feeling that, after he has cast his No vote, he will be packing up and moving back to ancestral Ireland.
With a name like “Kevin Lynch” I suppose I should just go pack my bags now and tidy up any lose ends. Frankly the article is just insulting. I didn’t think the unionists could stoop lower than suggesting we’d need a passport to get past the border checks at Gretna or threatening to bomb Glasgow Airport (the evil terrorists we’re supposed to be terrified of beat them to it). But this article is a whole new level of idiocy.
Such a thing would be considered “ethnic cleansing” in today’s world and would never be allowed. It would never be acceptable to the EU. Which the SNP are so desperate to cosy up to. Frankly the world is more likely to end in the next five minutes.
Sorry Rev – On second reading
I hope Scottish Catholics at least counter this British Unionist ‘pish’ from Dougherty
( Who ? and no connection to Labour, wink, wink by the way ) by reading the excellent fact based modern view of our shared history by Professor Tom Devine. (A Scots Catholic of Irish heritage)
A far better and informative no holds barred history on where we have come from and where we are now; … then make up your own minds.
Avoid the ‘brainwashing’ guys leave that to the Labour activists.
I’m guessing Dougherty’s attitude, though depressing, is typical of a certain generation of West of Scotland Catholics (although maybe less typical of his than of his parents’), and it’s more useful to try and understand it than to attack him for it. The one point on which I totally agree with him is his dislike of the phrase ‘the Scottish people’– as if there was any such thing. I know it’s politicians’ shorthand, but it’s a phrase with all kinds of unpleasant connotations (just like ‘the English/British/French/Chinese (whatever) people’), and it sounds exclusive, whereas the whole basis of the Pro-Indy case has to be wide-open inclusive: the debate isn’t about how ‘Scottish’ or how ‘British’ you feel, but about where power should lie for the good of Scottish society. ‘The people of Scotland’ is marginally better (and I think tends to be used more by the SG than ‘the Scottish people’?…), but any reference to ‘the people’ makes me cringe. AS, Nicola S etc should be savvy enough to avoid it.
I think Mr Dougherty would get a bit of a shock if he came over to Dublin.
My my, what a twisted, pathetic bigot the guy is.
Yes, the 3/4 of me that’s Scottish hates the 1/4 that’s Irish. Never liked my Gran; all the custard creams, bourbons and liquorice allsorts in the world couldn’t erase the fact she was Irish.
I also hate my dad and gang up on him my mum when we do our protestant thing. On alternate days of course; on the others I gang up with him to hate my mum and feel all tragically victimised. All in the name of Great British sectarianism of course.
I’ll be surprised if the Observer does not allow a reply. This could be an open goal for a reply. Dave McEwan Hill has one already prepared that could do the job.
Rev – What a devious B you are !
You’re probably just sitting back and loving watching this slow burner.
Its like one of those fireworks that just fizz away and seem to go out and then …….. !!!
Gordoz
Are you saying that the article is a Roman Candle?
Absolute and utter nonsense from Mr Dougherty.Same age, same background but totally different perspective from me and mine.His use of the “Braveheart” word should alert everyone to the stance and I really am bemused at his objections to the use of the Scottish as in “Scottish people” “Scottish sovereignty”.With all due respect Mr Dougherty how else should he refer to us?
This whole article smacks of the playing of the “Orange threat” card as exemplified by George Galloway.Another who claims to speak for the community from which I come.
Luckily more of us have read John MacLean and James Connolly than the newspaper for which he writes.
Divide and rule? Nae chance!!!
Better Together / Academic Brownshirts Launch.
Coz their dead clever n ‘at it must be right !
Professor Hugh Pennington has written us off in the usual way –
Too wee, too poor, too stupid,- too infectious!! (Manky Scots)
Bateman puts it better !
“At the launch, Professor Hugh Pennington, Britain’s leading microbiologist, confirmed the country’s worst fears by declaring that nationalism is indeed a virus. “I didn’t know this until I looked in my fridge and the remains of a haggis were undergoing putrefaction,” he said. “When the lab put it under the microscope they could clearly make out the face of Johann Lamont. Lab assistants leapt back in horror and declared a contamination emergency. I urge all Scots to be inoculated immediately.”
What are they like at the scare stories ?
Somwhat O/T, but this might cover an alternative historical narrative:
I caught this from BBC R4 today – and another 15 minutes around 1:45pm each day this week. It’s a promising start but I guess the history maybe a little dry for some, and since it does not seem to involve BBC Scotland it could be an interestingly “neutral” perspective. I’m hoping that it could be “mandatory listning” for anyone before voting next year, after all surely no-one could consider Radio4 to be biased to either side …
link to bbc.co.uk
Rusty rockets hasn’t managed to be on time…,
link to huffingtonpost.co.uk
@BtP
IMO its the Rev trying to get us firing our rockets in the right direction after the discussion on the DMH piece canted and all the rockets went off in the “wrong” direction 🙂
The trouble with rockets is they can be taken amiss and people end up writing poems about much mangled spanners and going all republican on one, so George told me.
Gerorge O’Galway you mean?
Gin wrote,
“it could be an interestingly “neutral” perspective”.
I beg to differ. I view all of the BBC’s activities, when discussing Scotland, with extreme suspicion. ‘Neutral’ is not a word that should ever be associated with that organisation.
I might listen nevertheless. I’ll be listening with extreme scepticism.
He should be worried about the future.
I read all of the article what stood out was the bit below his photo regarding the language of the independence movement and Alex Salmond in particular. Yer maun says he has a problem with the use of “the Scottish people” finding it exclusive and a cause for concern and if only Alex would use “The People of Scotland” instead. WTF I have always heard Alex Salmond and the rest of the SNP use the term “The people of Scotland” over and over and over again.
The guy is a bigot, but not an untypical one. The couple I mentioned in my “the Dirty War” piece on Wings coincidentally come from East Dunbartonshire. I’ve just had a correspondence with that authority about the suggestion made by them to a realive of mine that the SNP was closing their Catholic schools in East Dunbartonshire. As Labour, in coalition with Tory and LibDem control East Dunbartonshire, this is most certainly not the case. But this gives you the idea how heavy is the chip on the shouder of even some educated Catholics and how easy it is for Labour to keep it there
I am writing to the Catholic Observer at this very moment. I think their publishing of such a frankly disgusting article is completley unacceptable.
I am very glad this very critical problem is getting light of day.
Not sure what to make of that. I mean for a start 1934 to 2014 is 80 years not 70. It goes down hill from there. For someone born here he sounds like a stranger in a foreign land he absolutely loathes. I don’t believe any of it for a second.
As to the SNP not playing well to the Catholic Italian or Muslim community where is the evidence for this? As far as I can see they have strong representation and membership in the SNP and in Holyrood…better than Labour that is for sure. The modern large Polish community I don’t know so much about. I would have thought it a tad early for political preferences to be aired fluently.
As to the homophobia jibe at the end. If the SNP propose same sex marriage it is Boo Hiss Vote No and for Westminster who are passing the same Bill, I mean what the fuck is he on?
My call is he is a Labour man and Better Together supporter and is simply trying to stir it.
Signs and symbols of Scottishness are straight out of our ancient Scottish Catholic history and heritage such as our bonny national flag, the Saltire, and our national patron saint, St Andrew.
Our great national patriots and freedom fighters were Scottish Catholics, William Wallace and Robert the Bruce. The Bruce was such a loyal and devoted member of the Scottish Catholic Church he even had his corpse taken on Catholic pilgrimage to the Holy Lands which is where the actual reference to “Braveheart” comes from.
Personally, I don’t see where the benefit to Scottish Calvinism lies in the SNP Government promoting St Andrews Day to a national bank holiday. Sounds like idolatry to me.
If there is any overt anti-Catholicism in movement and campaign for Scottish independence then I’m struggling to see it. In fact, I can see people questioning the unionists myths and historical distortions about Scottish history and realising there’s more to ourselves than what we learned in school, which wasn’t very much.
O/T I am afraid the fears that some teachers are being less than honest about the independence referendum appear to be confirmed by Alan Bissett’s article on National Collective. He attended B.T ‘s Falkirk meeting:
‘So to the questions-and-answer session, which provides an insight into the agenda, concerns and tactics of street-level Unionists. Disturbingly, a woman asks Margaret Mitchell how the Higher Education sector can help Better Together. The correct response should be: ‘Legally, it can’t. Schools, colleges and universities are bound by impartiality rules.’ Having already admitted, however, that the media are on their side, Mitchell implies further skullduggery:
“The Higher Education sector can help [emphasis mine] by presenting the facts as is. You have to be careful, but you can still give young people the facts fairly and objectively.”
At first glance this seems reasonable enough. But the question, remember, was, ‘How can the sector help the Better Together campaign?’ Given neither Mitchell nor the questioner are ‘objective’, whose ‘facts’, exactly, is she proposing that the sector advance? Her choice of language is considered, but her subtext is that college and university lecturers should use their position to put forth Unionist ‘facts’. Were it not so, why does Mitchell follow, ‘You have to be careful’ with a ‘but’? That the question was even asked shows that there are teachers out there happy to do this.’
Every week at FMQs, when Alex Salmond is asked the standard question about what he will be discussing at the cabinet meeting, he answers “Matters of importance to the people of Scotland.” I’m surprised an experienced media man like Dougherty doesn’t know that.
If D M H can get the S C Obs to print his rebuttal, it could all have backfired on SLab, bautifully.
I am thinking that this is all a Slab set up, accusing the SNP of being anti RC.
Getting their poison in first.
I’ve sent my tuppence worth to Mr Dougherty’s paper, and I’m quite pleased to report I managed not to swear.
The whole SNP not playing well with Catholics thing is bogus. It was started by Labour at the time because the SNP took a seat from them. Took their power. And Labour have hated the SNP ever since.
This piece by Dougherty is so stupid in approach and content, so full of non seqiturs that I wonder if it is just a wind-up.
Anyway what is the news on Georgeous George? Is anybody buying his £12 tickets?
12 people, allegedly and if the two for one offer is on, that could be just 6.
Are his parents still alive and does he have any brothers and sisters? He has had several wives and sizzling affaires though.
Every week at FMQs, when Alex Salmond is asked the standard question about what he will be discussing at the cabinet meeting, he answers “Matters of importance to the people of Scotland.” I’m surprised an experienced media man like Dougherty doesn’t know that.
Isn’t Shuggie wanting him to say “the PeopleS of Scotland”? Apparently he doesn’t recognise a single “people” of this wee country, however diverse. Divisive, much?
As others have said, he sounds like someone reluctantly forced to make his home in a foreign country he hates.
I like Hugh Dougherty, probably because I went to school with him-and he and his father used to give me a lift much of the way home from Celtic Park 🙂
He is however one of life’s eccentrics, and typical of few even within the community in which he moves.
Although I can reasonably claim to be more Irish than him, having an Irish mother (she voted SNP for 40 years until her death, as she saw the obvious similarities between Ireland and Scotland in terms of the logic of independence) as my recollection is that neither of his parents were actually born in Ireland.
I can state without a shadow of a doubt that his near-obsession with Irish history was NOT shared by many (if any) other people in the school. Even as early as the late sixties, the result of a school debate produced a drawn result for or against independence.
His views don’t appear to have changed much over the years if this article is anything to go by.
I fear it looks as if nothing will ever alter his narrow views so I say:
Don’t worry too much about him: he was untypical of Catholics even in the sixties, he is a relic of the past nowadays. As others have pointed out, how sad and ironic that today he would find those other Irish obsessives, the Orange Orde,r as his most devout allies.
I did not bother to read past the first couple of lines,
What a load of shite
I wonder if after a YES vote he will get a £10 passage to Oz?
Anybody want to chip in?
I have a cousin in Canberra working in Aboriginal affairs for the Federal Government.
I am sur she could swing him a visa.
A balancing piece is obviously required, and an even-handed journal ought to be happy to publish one. And DMH is just the man I think.
I think forking out £12 to hear George rant about his pet hobby horses would be an act of penance for some pretty serious sinning.
HandandShrimp
I think, like Gordon Brown, George Galloway is an ex-politician although the pay per view for Gordon is much more expensive, better attended and in warmer places than the Gorgeous George’s nostalgia tour.
Totally O/T (sorry Rev).
The FM seems to be going down a treat with those nasty foreign types over in China just now. My wife has got some great pictures on her facebook thing but I haven’t got the foggiest how to post them here.
Rest assured he’s doing a great job promoting our country to the Chinese world.
I have patiently read over most of the contributions from the Wings community and I agree with much of the basic points made by many but I am struggling to get my head round the basic points this guy is making
1. Daugherty’s seems to want to characterise the SNP as an organisation pretending to appeal to the Scottish Catholic vote while secretly harbouring a crypto Calvinist plan hatched in the 1930’s to oppress Scottish Catholics with an Irish heritage after a YES vote.
2. This he seems to believe is because Scottish Catholics with an Irish heritage somehow do not “qualify” as proper Scots because the SNP is a nest of bigots determined to destroy the Catholic community post independence
3. He believes sectarianism is permanent in Scotland and Catholics will continue to suffer from this only more so post independence. Meanwhile his comments about “mixed marriages” and homosexuality are deplorable.
He needs to check out YES Scotland and see the civic nationalist movement for what it is – the finest and best example of an organisation encompassing all Scots whatever their background in one place, coming together to try and build something new and better than what we have. It is a glimpse of what we might become to escape the fear and darkness of the past where Mr Daugherty is happy to be.
Maybe it is best to take Doug Daniel’s advice above – leave him be and move on
warmer places: I had this vision of our ex-MP for K’dy + Cowdenbeath being confronted by a horned Peter Meddlesome with forked tail and Trident and then I discovered you weren’t being allusional. 🙁
He is out somewhere in the M East, one of the modern democracies, filling his sea boots.
If he is in another deeper, warmer, toastier, more cloven hooved place I would warrant that his host is Tony Blair.
I was wondering if he had noticed that the UK government had brought in equality in marriage for England and Wales, and that it has the support of unionist parties in Edinburgh.
As Doug says, best to move on and leave him to his bigotry. Nothing in the world, least of all facts, will change his mind.
If the Kirk said something rude and appologised and still cannot be forgiven, when will our Tone who lied to ruin a nation and still hasn’t appologised be foregiven? What happens to his soul untill then?
I come from an Ulster Presbyterian background, my wife is an Irish Catholic from Kilkenny, and we are raising our two boys in the west of Scotland as Catholics. Both of us believe in an independent Scotland because of the promise that that independent country holds for our kids’ futures.
Scotland was indeed a somewhat nasty bigoted place in the 1930s in terms of anti-Catholicism, but this is the 21st century, society has moved on. The plain reality is that religion is almost an irrelevance in today’s day and age – fewer people are going to church, as the last census results pointed out, with only the RC community barely holding its own since the previous census in numbers. Scottish independence – or the continued union – will happen despite the churches, not because of their insight or supposed influence.
So let’s concentrate on what’s really important – better democracy in our shared land, and how we can best secure that by voting Yes next year.
Why does Mr Dougherty type his faith with a capital F?
Celtic supporters for Independence would strongly disagree with this dinosaurs extreme ignorance and self confessed paranoia.
I almost pity the fool.
when braveheart gets mentioned I call it the all credibility lost clause
Dublin is 40 minutes away by plane. I suggest he gets the first available flight home. Loads of Catholics there living in a sovereign, independent state where the electorate get to vote the government they want.
And get it.
Well just to go OT for a moment, did anyone go to the “academics together” meeting, I have read a little something on the BBC site but it was just the usual we’re doomed shite.
Do we know the numbers attending ? was it anyone we may know ? does the world come to an end scientificly if we vote YES.
Anyone ?
O/T again!
It’s always nice to finish a day with a laugh.
Labour have said they will NOT reopen the Falkirk enquiry and their spokesman actually said:
The Labour spokesman added: “Throughout this process we have acted to uphold the integrity of the Labour Party” ( BBC news page)
I haven’t laughed so much since my granny died.
Wonder where this leaves JL?
@JPJ2 – Totally agree with you. I had dealing with the man in my professional life. He is one of life’s eccentrics and his views in no way represent the views of Catholics in modern day Scotland.
This guy goes to extreme lengths to adjoin sectarianism to the SNP. Like many others, I picked up immediately on the words ‘Maybe I’m paranoid…’
Says it all.
O/T
Since when did we become ‘alert viewers’ rather than ‘alert readers’? Is the Rev making a break for modern tele-thingy technology?
East Refrewshire demographics from 2001 census:
White – 96.19% – 86,196
White British – 93.49% – 83,776
White Irish – 1.3% – 1165
Other White – 1.4% – 1255
Mixed Race – 0.21% – 188
South Asian – 2.93% – 2,626
Indian – 0.77% – 690
Pakistani – 1.98% – 1774
Bangladeshi – 0.01% – 9
Other South Asian – 0.17% – 153
Black – 0.071% – 63
Black Caribbean – 0.03% – 27
Black African – 0.04% – 35
Other Black – 0.001% – 1
Chinese – 0.38% – 340
Other – 0.21% – 197
Revolting bigot writes revolting shite. People like him need to be paraded through the streets so people can point and laugh at the cretin. Evil needs to be fought by all means necessary.
Vote NO for the right to burn a Catholic in public once a year. Very timely article.
@ FraserLeith
I find it very hard to have sympathy for someone who doesn’t want to be discriminated against, although wants to return to a time when he could discriminate against me.
Welcome to Northern Ireland!
A wee birdie just told me that the Prestwick Prom will be going ahead as normal after all – only have the one source, can’t confirm it elsewhere. If true, it’s great news for Prestwick, and Ayrshire more generally, but that doesn’t mean this particular stushie is over.
Now, we press the Prestwick North Community Council to state unequivocally what their position is re Yes Scotland/Better Together, political parties and/or campaigning groups being ‘invited’ to participate on the day. No more fence-sitting or posturing.
Make no mistake friends – the real players in Scottish politics (at all levels) make it their business to ‘keep across’ sites like this, and they know the makings of a shit-storm when they see it. Someone has overruled that PNCC decision (if this report is accurate) and they’ve done it very very quickly.
But have they done it quickly enough to stave-off coverage of the SSP’s ‘threat’ to organise an alternative People’s Fun Day. We shall soon see…
big al says
“A completely disingenuous piece.
Those aren’t his reasons for voting no.”
Finally
a post I can totally agree with, this disingenuous rubbish has not one ounce of belief in it and reeks of hypocrisy, this man probably cant remember the last time he went to confession,
the mass was probably in latin the last time he went, how dare he treat good decent god fearing people with such contempt as to try to sway their vote with such palpable nonsense.
This mans behavior makes me very angry.
Sorry, O/T: From the Telegraph:
————–
‘Tory MPs secretly want Scotland independence for Westminster majority’ claims Lord ForsythJohn Major: “From a purely political point of view we would be better off without Scotland but the UK would not – the UK needs Scotland it ought to have Scotland.”http://bit.ly/16zDWAx
————–
Maybe @scottish_skier is on to something after all!
I don’t know about anyone else but I find John Major’s possessive quote rather offensive (“it [the UK] ought to have Scotland”).
However on the plus side, in saying, “the UK would not [be better off without Scotland] – the UK needs Scotland,” he utterly scotches the subsidy myth!
Cwiffer:
I think the whole of the UK was like that. I remember my grandparents telling me of signs in boarding houses windows in Blackpool and the likes that said
No Blacks, No Irish, No dogs.
As for the church of Scotland, I think that large sections of it, possibly all of it were as bigoted as people like Paisley and the Robinsons in Ulster. You’ll remember perhaps that Mrs Robinson was the one who said that paedophiles were preferable to gay people… and that was only a few years ago (just before it was discovered that she (at 60) was having an affair with her dead friend’s teenage son!).
There’s bigotry everywhere, along with a healthy dose of hypocrisy.
Dougherty drivels ,
My son Brendan is enjoying life in Adelaide as a practicing doctor, he is deliriously pleased that no one in Adelaide has asked him what school he attended .
FFS,
Glasgow Labour go begging to the Orange Order for votes for marches on Sunday,s and this ignorant Scotland loathing wanker blames the SNP.
ps,
Irish catholic unionists are as scarce as hens teeth gorging on a hairy apple.
I suspect he is a BT plant.
The bloke that lives along the end of our wee street is Colombian and Roman Catholic; he and his family are SNP supporters.
The guy who lives across the road is a Scot and he is also a Catholic. He will be voting Yes.
The big Polish guy (Catholic) who lives locally tells me he and his wife (also Polish) are going to vote Yes.
The German girl I met who lives in Skye is a Catholic. She also believes in Scottish independence.
I am a Scottish Presbyterian who will be voting Yes. All the people I mentioned above are my friends.
Mr. Dougherty, writer of that article in The Catholic Observer, isn’t simply a dinosaur; he is a fossil.
@ian
Good news, if true. But pressing the CC to state their position unequivocally is probably not the way forward…..Because the Code of Conduct states that they have a duty to represent the best interests of the community….and who is going to dare argue against the proposition that the best interests of the community consist of the community being better informed about the referendum than not?
In other words, you don’t need to ask them to state anything. You just need to remind them of their responsibilities and ask how they intend to fulfill them with respect to the referedum.
Setting a trap is always more pleasing than hitting someone with a stick….
I’m a Catholic, born in Glasgow, lived in west-central Scotland all my life, attended three different Catholic schools. I can’t remember anyone ever taking any interest in my surname or the names of my schools, or treating me any differently because of my obvious Catholic-ness. Quite literally the only people who have ever told me I can’t be Scottish because of my Irish ancestry are English Tories on a certain right-wing political discussion forum.
It’s like Dougherty and his son are describing a Scotland from a parallel universe – one that is stuck in 1957. Who the hell worries about “mixed marriages” anymore? How many Catholics really think of themselves as being part of an “Irish diaspora”? Technically we are, of course, but we’re so well-integrated now that I don’t think many people are super-conscious of their Irish heritage.
ian brotherhood, i agree with alot u say and do. i want to be in your gang
Sorry haven’t read the thread yet, but there are so many contradictions and inaccuracies, where do you start.
AAH 150+ comments I guess you have.
Taking him at face value, I feel a bit sorry for the article’s author.
He clearly feels his Irish identity very strongly, and for some people the ramping up of the Scottish agenda in Scotland gives them a fear that their identity’s position in society will be disturbed from its comfortable position.
Nonsensical? Yes, but if people feel it – they feel it.
The article simply heaves with misinformed opinions, those are always addressable. Even if he remains locked in to his own misrepresentation of the independence movement, his readership will likely be exposed to facts in the time till the vote.
I remember back in 1977, my lab partner at uni was a Catholic girl from Easterhouse who was extraordinarily brainy. (I believe she is a hospital consultant now.) She once said something a bit daft and without thinking I said “are you Irish or something?” (Yes, stupid borderline racist remark but it was 1977 and we were young and thoughtless.)
She looked at me sideways and said “actually yes”, and then we both cracked up laughing.
That’s the only time I remember anyone self-identifying as Irish because of their Catholicism.
O/T – Anas Sanwar – Scotland Tonight – Tran wreck alert, Train wreck alert
jeezo,how crap is john mackay ?
Is there perchance some connection between this PR (retired?) and Paul Sinclair, johann Lamont’s PR man ? I think there is something very unsettling here. Me thinks someone could be mischief making here maybe a decoy to unsettle the horses. Maybe it’s just that hugh spent so much time in local government affairs. Maybe I’m just silly. That’s it I’m Just to old.
@kininvie-
Appreciated, and understood.
(But hey, we’re the SSP dontcha know? We’re aye moaning about something!)
You’re right though – all the PNCC have to do is make sure that they understand their own responsibilities. If they do that, and communicate that understanding to the local community in a way that also makes sense to non-Prestwick folk? No problem.
But they haven’t done that. Yet. And so, they’re now involved in a damage-limitation exercise, with no-one to blame but themselves. It would be very helpful, for everyone and anyone with an interest in the conduct of the Prestwick Prom 2014, to know precisely who is or isn’t ‘invited’ to the event.
Until they do that, SSP will press for clarification.
John MacKay, Scotland Tonight has made a right pig’s ear again in again in his interview with Anas Sarwar. Sarwar never answered a question and MacKay was very weak in trying to get Sarwar to answer.
It does seem odd in our modern society, that the Labour Party in Scotland seem happy to contradict any movement towards eradication of religious bigotry, but further there MP’s in particular revel in perpetuating the poison of sectarianism within selected elements of our communities, to suit there own ends. To point the finger at the SNP is a tactic wearing thin with the general public for the most part.
This political poison from Labour still goes unchallenged by our media and unfortunately some religious bodies. Articles such as this from Dougherty come near to scraping the bottom of the barrel and set a new standard for this form of deflection tactic.
Got to give a bit of credit to Scotland Tonight – To allow Alistair Gray that platform and his plain simple language for the cause of Independence has gone a bit down the road of gaining a bit more respect and Im sure a hella lot more YES votes – Happy chappy tonight
Was not the ‘Declaration of Arbroath’ sent to Rome asking for the papal blessing and pleading with the pope to annul his papal bull which had declared the country of Scotland as being excommunicated? This was not a war between Norman lords. It was a war fought by the “people of Scotland” against an invading army for the right to be classified as a sovereign individual residing freely in a free Scotland.
Those days we had a catholic King. As the present status quo stands – there is only ever going to be a protestant on the throne. Unless Scotland votes to change the present system, the sectarianism that he speaks of will be allowed to be perpetuated at the very highest office in the land. (why does he support that?)
If the N. Irish like Ian Paisley he mentions, and the orange order are so keen to vote No and keep Scotland within the union, he surely must see that something is seriously wrong with his logic.
Might I suggest that his whole irrational thinking is the result of a deep rooted loathing of Scotland. It is the idea that should Scotland become independent that it will move further away from his archaic 20th century dividedness that he seems to be desperately clinging on to. All he needs to do is put a chart on his wall and stick some pictures of the ‘prominent’ no voters and the prominent yes voters and then decide where he will place the picture of himself. Perhaps then the penny might drop for him. Unless of course, he wishes to stick his picture along side Mr. Paisley.
John MacKay is just not up to the political game.
Wow nice to hear sense from a former Labour stalwart of SRC, Charles Gray. Thats one over to us ! Hope he is right and some of the Labour old gaurd are set to jump ship and vote YES.
@david-
‘i want to be in your gang.’
Aye man, no worries. You’re in.
Good news?
The initiation ceremony doesn’t involve any tattooing, branding, or bareknuckle cage-wrestling with pit-bull terriers.
Bad news?
It does involve transcribing five hours worth of Johann Lamont’s Greatest ‘speeches’.
Bad news day for London Labour Scottish Branch. Jola goes walkabout, Anas still acts like a tit and Charlie Gray tells it like it is. Happy Days !
Charles Gray was a very eloquent advocate of a YES vote……..
He very calmly & politely rubbished his party leadership at Westminister and Holyrood as useless and unworthy of the heritage of his party……
He also seemed to suggest…..vote YES and we’ll get rid of this shower and take our party back.
Not even Baron Foulkes can describe him as a ‘Cybernat’
Wow ! Eric Joyce just commented ” Like most people in Scotland, I don’t take johann Lamont seriously” Quality !
Thegreatbaldo 11:00 pm
total agreement with your views. A gentleman & sincere.
I’m sorry to see that despite Hugh’s good education at St Aloysius’ College, and a past life as a journalist, he has been unable to grasp the simple concept of ‘the Scottish people’. How often do we have to tell him that anyone who was born here, or chooses to live here will be welcomed and will be able to hold a Scottish Passport. He IS paranoid! I too experienced the reality of anti-Irish, Scottish Protestantism in my youth. But I could see that it was fuelled by the Union, the Orange Lodge, and some supporters of a certain football club.
I’m sorry that Hugh can’t see that gay marriage is not a particularly Scottish phenomenon, and that the rest of the Union, and much of the rest of the world, is heading the same way, so voting ‘no’ won’t make any difference. As for Catholics being punished for not being exactly the best SNP supporters over the last 70 years, well they haven’t been rewarded for supporting Labour in their droves, as more and more have come to realise. Alex Salmond has spoken out against religious discrimination, in particular discrimination against Catholics, how many of the other party leaders have supported his call? I always find it hard to understand how so-called educated people fail to see that a vote for independence is not a vote for SNP rule, but a vote for a free democratic country, with whichever government the people of Scotland choose to vote for.
Sorry Hugh, if you don’t like the way things are in Scotland, I’m afraid the blame lies with the Union, and all it stands for. Release us from the Union, and the sectarian bigots will lose a lot of their ammunition. This Catholic will be voting YES for a fairer and more equal society for Scotland.
I beg to differ
I felt John Mckay did fine against Anas. Nobody sensible watching could be in any doubt that Anas wasn’t answering the questions and had nothing to say.. That sort of respectful interview is very often more revealing. Did some people expect McKay to behave the way Nicola and Alex get harangued.
Not even Baron Foulkes can describe him as a ‘Cybernat’ ?
Oh I think he’ll still have a go ! He can’t help himself.
Ian Brotherhood…
Can I ask where on earth you’re gonna find 5 hours of Johann Lamont’s greatest speeches…or come to that 5 minutes?
Given that you can’t, can I join your gang too!
Um are we supposed to take seriously views expressed in publications that posit an afterlife of eternity in the company of people you can barely manage for one day called ‘Christmas’?
@Tris-
Yes, you can. You’re in.
Your initiation is to find the five hours’ worth of ‘Lamontment’ which dave then has to transcribe…
…next?
Johann Lamont is not a member of the Labour NEC. Not many people realise this and how really weak and unimportant the Labour Party in Scotland really is.
@David
“ian brotherhood, i agree with alot u say and do. i want to be in your gang”
link to scottishsocialistparty.org
Membership is £6 per month
I am Catholic, born in Glasgow and my mother is a Protestant. Go figure Hugh, wrong with your point on the dissolution of the Catholic Faith in Scotland.
I have had peeps enquire as to which school I went to or to which team I support but, truth be told, they where older, less encompassing types, just like Hugh. It may have led to me losing a job but I didn’t dwell on it or let it hold me back.
If Hugh wants to band with the very people who would hate him just because of his religion, who am I to try and stop such stupidity? I also take umbrage with him lying about not being affiliated with any political party, get thee off to the confessional sinner.
I have complained to the editor and have replied to the article in the Catholic Observer. We’ll see if I get any response. Her email address is editor@sconews.co.uk of anybody else feels similarly inclined.
Just to stir it up and to think outside the box.
Why can’t an independent Scotland with a monarch ( for now the House of Windsor aka Saxe-Coburg Gotha) permit under Scots Law that a future king or queen of Scots may be a Catholic.
good night
Just been watching Scotland Tonight and Newsnight Scotland. Seemed strange not to hear any comments detrimental to the SNP. On the contrary in fact. The Labour grandee, Charles Grey, was a breath of fresh air. He put the case for independence well in a calm and gentle manner. It was great to hear him say that there are many more within the Labour Party who are pro independence. Those at BT HQ must have been grinding their teeth to breaking point.
No-one with anything good to say about Jola. Her fuschia jaiket might be on a shooglier peg than she thinks – Eric Joyce and Simon Pia putting the boot in – and another car crash interview with Anas Sarwar – another Slab who likes to emphasise ‘What I’m saying is’, then goes into a long waffle telling us absolutely nothing. Best TV I’ve watched in ages.
Ian…
Won’t happen any time soon then, will it! 🙂
On the subject of this “Report” from the Labour Party. Does anyone have any idea why they don’t want it to be made public.
Could it be that Johann Lamont instructed Stevie Deans to select a Unite union member as the candidate for the Falkirk MP position.
Suggestions please, of the contents of this report.
Surely it should be lamentable Lamontations – she could win an award for that.
AYe we re aw anti Catholic Anti Irish I ll read the piece the moora Michiel Flattelys on Peirs Mogan That Cunt needs a TAP on the heid
Wow. Just saw Charlie Gray on Scotland Tonight. He calmly cut through BT’s BS and had a nice dig at the M$M and their increasingly vain desire for a No vote. Potentially a hugely significant intervention.
@ Robert Kerr
Why would an independent Scotland need a monarch?
Why would we want to set some-one of the super rich, privileged class above us?
apoligise I said Alistair Gray earlier – meant Charles
I’m 5 years younger than MrDougherty. Born and brought up in Glasgow. My mum is Italian and my late father Scottish. They got married in 1953. I will be voting yes.
Someone on the thread has just reminded me of the Labour Party’s duplicitous involvement with the Orange Order in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Labour in Northern Ireland is using the Glasgow Labour Party’s attempts to mobilise the Orange vote, in its desperate bid to stave off the SNP in Glasgow at the last local government elections, as evidence that Scottish Orangemen are voluntarily supporting Labour, therefore, so should their Northern Irish counterparts.
Boyd Black, Labour Party secretary in Northern Ireland –
The Northern Ireland public is Labour inclined in its orientation and culture. The comparison with Scotland is relevant. There, where the Conservatives and Unionists were once dominant, Labour is now the major party, with the Tories returning just one MP to Westminster from the whole of Scotland. In Scotland even the Orange Order now supports the Labour Party!
Reference –
The Future Must be Labour by Boyd Black
Labour in Northern Ireland
no date
link to labourpartyni.org
@Jimbo
£6 a month??? No wonder I’m not a Socialist. It’s worse than the price of beer :-))
But on the monarchy point: I dislike the vacuous Windsors, but I dislike the Presidential model even more. Last thing I want is someone as head of state who has got there by clambering the greasy pole and has amassed all kinds of favours to be paid off on the way.
The clear solution is an elected monarchy. The Scottish crown has long been within the gift of the Scottish people. We choose somone – for preference well outside the domestic political area, maybe not even Scottish (how good would it have been to have offered the crown to Mandela). When they die, we nominate and choose again.
Hows about Blair Jenkins says “And dont forget a Catholic can believe they can lead this country but history suggests they cant lead Britain”…then again…would that be too big a risk to take daring to voice such a promise?
Down with this sort of thing
Perhaps the problem is this idea that we will have a more equal society?
I mean, what if it becomes so equal that all our children can be educated together? eeeeek
No enquiry re: labour at Falkirk.
link to archive.is
I thought Christian Dailly was a footballer?
Sorry.
Crikey, everyone should watch that Charles Grey interview.
is that the first domino? permission to break ranks?
I worked for SRC under Charles Grey he was well liked by most. Quite an achievement within SRC.
@Kininve at 12;18am
I am with you on the monarchy thing. Question can anyone name a living President that is not in the pocket of big business?
@Jimbo
Is there not some conflict between you view on the monarchy and your gravatar image. Just sayin like! 😉
MIJ
Mary Morrison of Eire? OK not currently President but she was and has moved onto to some UN job.
She is married to a proddy from Ulster. Oh the progressive shame of it!
Seems like Eire has progressed faster than a certain Labour apparatchik “RC” journalist?
@ ronnie anderson
Ronnie, I love your contributions. I hope you get sorted pal. Keep us up to date with how things are going.
But, here’s something, if they fix your heid thing, I hope you are still as to the point and irreverent in health as you are now with your illness.
Be well Ronnie.
Alex
I’ve just watched the interviews from last night and what a breath of fresh air they were! Charles Gray was calm and rational, not qualities we’ve come to expect from Labour reps. Eric Joyce’s comments regarding Lamont were very telling. That guy continues to earn my respect. All in, a good day for Scotland.
Correction to my post above at 5:47
It should have read, Mary ROBINSON, not Morrison.
I believe she is an inveterate reader of Wings, as are all the other World Leaders, which lets out Cameron, JoLa, any real Labour leader and Vince Cable.
Sorry Mary.
o/t call me dave post a great little vid on newnet
sorry if you’ve posted it here dave but I still wanted to get my tuppence worth in anyway.
Great interviews with some of Wings stalwarts (names withheld) the sentiment that the rev should be honored in an independent Scotland for his relentless efforts to do the msm’s job for them (you know who you are)I’m right with you on that one
In spite of crippling arthritis my wife insisted on us going up to the muster point at the Albanach because she knew how much I wanted one of the badges the rev was giving out (too late for the silver one but still got a white badge).
But as she was too afraid to march with the group we made our own way to Calton hill before the march began as such I wasn’t on the video,
but I couldn’t be happier because the effort to do that for my wife was immense and she would not be swayed even though we took the (thoughtfully provided) shuttlebus up the hill itself, I have no words for the pride I feel in my wife and there’s always next year to get into a video which will go down in history,
because with support like hers HOW CAN WE POSSIBLY LOSE 🙂
Niel McKenzie says
“Vote NO for the right to burn a Catholic in public once a year. Very timely article.”
Its possible that comment could be lost on some people Neil
of course your referring to November the fifth and Guy Fawkes night
I wonder what Mr Dougherty’s opinion of a country that will allow its doctors to stand aside and watch a woman die rather than go against their faith and perform an abortion
link to tinyurl.com
ps Im a lapsed catholic
Bugger the panda says
“Conan,
Have I something for him and you.”
I swear my sporran grew bigger after reading that 😉
handclapping says
“His attitude reminds me of those pictures of maltreated dogs grovelling in fear in front of their rescuers because they are unable to think that their new humans might be nice. Shame really.”
What a superb analogy,
can I use it?
handclapping says
@kininvie
“You may read it as expressing a perception. I read it as delberately creating a false perspective.”
Sorry kininvie as much as I have enormous respect for your veiws I’m with handclapping on that one, he is not airing a widely held fear/belief in the catholic community therefore he can only be using those old concerns to rake up an issue that is long dead,
this is calumny of the lowest order!
“He has more in common with those Orangemen who protest against independence than he does with me.”
Maybe that’s it, does he foresee an inclusive country which will not tolerate HIS kind of intolerance and doesn’t like it, what place for him and his OO freinds/enemies in an enlightened Scotland?
Hugh Dougherty quote
“However, if you called me a spin doctor, I’d be very upset.”
OK Hugh prepare to be upset your a spin doctor
look your pants are on fire
It doesn’t matter Catholic/Protestant/Atheist/ or whatever. It’s just a Labour/Unionist expressing a view. Quelle surprise. Colluding with a system from which they did well. Can be out voted.
Catholic/Protestant cancel one another out. 1,200,00 Protetant, 800,000 Catholic. 2million –
1 million practising. 4million electorate. Can be out voted.
Colluding with Political Parties of illegal wars and greedy defrauding bankers. Thou shall not kill. Greed and avarice.
‘The BedroomTax’.
‘Not very concerned about the future’
@John King
John, you and your wife have my total admiration. Best wishes to you both and in keeping with the Irishness of this thread; ‘may the sun always be on your back and the pavement rise to meet your feet’.
If you really want your children to be brought up with specific beliefs, do it yourself, or turn it over to a religious organisation to do it. Don’t expect schools to do it for you. Schools are there to educate, and help children become good and useful members of society. Mr Dougherty is a good example of a product of the current system.
Well, that was a brief dalliance with balance on the BBC. All mention of the Falkirk ‘unpleasantness’ removed from Radio Scotland this morning. How unlike..oh, I don’t know..the week-long concerted campaign on the BBC to portray Alex Salmond as Murdoch’s lapdog in the run-up to the 2012 council elections.
But let’s ascribe the difference to incompetence and not malicious design, eh Mr Bateman?
@John King
Big smiley thingy. Tell your Mrs she’s an angel. 🙂
Just watched the Charles Gray interview. What a nice guy!
“Setting a trap is better than hitting them with a stick”
love it but I prefer to catch them in the trap and then beat them with a really big stick
Slightly O/T – I see there is an interesting article (quite a few I hasten to add, but this one caught my eye) on Newsnet which highlighted a discussion on BBC’s Sunday Politics East (so obviously would escape viewers in Scotland). In it we hear Richard Bacon, the MP for South Norfolk completely rubbish the idea that there would be border controls if Scotland became independent. What’s interesting is the BBC interviewer trying to ‘correct’ him, but he is too good for her and continues. Obviously he didn’t get the Better Together briefing notes.
link to newsnetscotland.com
The programme is interesting to watch as they have a section on Scottish independence which starts at 42 mins 43
link to bbc.co.uk
The item that follows the discussion on Scottish Independence is about the EU and membership (who says the BBC don’t do irony)
Sounds like he may be a colleague of Councillor T. Kelly 🙂
Is it not a fact that only 15% of those who declare themselves as Christian actually practice.
It seems in Shug Dougherty’s case he needs more practice than most – “Love thy neighbour”, and all that.
“Is it not a fact that only 15% of those who declare themselves as Christian actually practice. “
Yeah, some people are just naturally really good at it.
Rev Stu
They are just hedging their bets
If they say they do not believe in God and there is a God, wow they go that terrible hot place along with all the unionist politicians, and I don’t mean a junket to Barbados.
If there is no God, well they have really lost nowt.
By the way, I did get your alternative meaning.
Scotland tonight.
Falkirk first and then Mr Gray recruit to YES 9 mins in.
http://player.stv.tv/programmes/scotland-tonight/2013-11-04-2230/
I read his piece, all of it, unlike some who stopped at the word “Braveheart”.
He has a fair point. Knee jerk anti Catholicism is the default position of many, including those who claim to be “humanist”,” secularist” or whatever. Some of the comments here confirm that. Indeed historically he is very right, there was systematic bigotry and discrimination directed at Catholics in West Central Scotland. It is evident that many non Catholics get upset when this is pointed out. They come out with remarks like “perhaps he is in the wrong country” and so on. Not all, by any means, but many.
Two points.
Gay marriage. No Scottish government is beholden to do what the Catholic Church wants on gay marriage. But every Scottish government must listen to the Catholic Church’s view on this, as it should listen to the C of S view and the views of many others, including in the gay lobby. The idea that the Catholic Church should not be allowed to lobby government when everyone else does is itself bigotted.
Schools. If you don’t like Catholic schools then don’t send your kids there. The idea that only one ethical and world view template may be used in state schools is oppressive and flies in the face of the reality of modern, pluralist Scotland. Our neighbours to the south have Catholic schools, I am posting from London, and the kind of discourse on Catholic schools I read in Scotland would be unthinkable here. Catholics and Jews pay taxes too. So why should some “humanists” feel they have the right to ram their world view down my childrens’ throats at my childrens’ school which I pay taxes for. There is no value free education, and non religion in schools is not a default position. Its a value position.
By the way, I am a Catholic of Irish extraction and will be voting for independence. But if you want to help the No campaign then make sure they see some of the comments above.
“The idea that the Catholic Church should not be allowed to lobby government when everyone else does is itself bigotted.”
I haven’t seen anyone say they shouldn’t be allowed to lobby. I’ve seen people say they shouldn’t be listened to on this issue. Not the same thing.
@jimbo,
Indeed, if it is the will of the Scottish People(s) there can be a Commonweal(th)..
After all it happened in England.
link to en.wikipedia.org
We live in the 21st Century and yet we are still bombarded with crap like this., I would suggest that the likes of this individual is part of a dying generation who do not reflect the opinion of modern Scotland
Isn’t it funny how films like Braveheart and Rob Roy are referenced here to flesh out the intended lunacy of being a Yes supporter. Yet vehemently opposing the marriage of two people, regardless of their sex, in the year 2013 is deemed ‘normal’?
Even with living in the West of Scotland since I was born, in all those 40+ years I have never had anyone “probe” me or even ask me anything about my religion. It IS paranoia, I know noone who has this mentality.
As a born Scot, of Irish descent on both sides, who attended Catholic schools while living in Scotland, I must express my embarrassment and shame at Mr Dougherty’s ignorance and bigotry. I have never, as a member of the SNP , felt or heard any anti-Catholic sentiment from them or anyone in the YES movement. Then why should I feel shame? Dougherty has Labour in Scotland connections and any political sectarianism around is promulgated by them. Of little interest to most, I gave up on religion about age 18 because of the nastiness that used to be around on both sides. Returning to Scotland after 40 years moving around I find that sectarianism is a dying creed and is only kept alive by the OO and clowns like Dougherty! Scotland will flourish because of it’s progressively minded people, Dougherty and co have little to offer our future – ignore them!
@gollygosh: The fact that some people think this chap is a total berk has nothing to do with his religious affiliation, and everything to do with the fact he’s a berk.
As for Catholic schools, or indeed any religious schools, what you fail to recognise is that the secular position is not that schools should teach children “only one ethical and world view template”, it’s that -schools shouldn’t be involved in teaching children “world views” at all-. School should be about providing children with the intellectual tools they need to engage with the world around them, in cases where teaching those tools requires specific examples to be cited and discussed those examples should be drawn from as wide ranging a set as possible.
Divvying children up according to an attribute which has been assigned to them by their parents and which -they may not even share, presently or in the future-, and then educating them differently is atrocious and should NOT be supported with state funds. I fully support the presence in the curriculum of a class which makes a thorough and unbiased intellectual examination of religion, philosophy, and ethics, but state schools should not be allowed to frame what should be a purely academic exploration of other non-religious subjects like science within the narrow confines of a particular religious worldview.
That is not discriminatory, it is not biased, it is indeed the very -opposite- of those things because it applies equally regardless of what arbitrary reason you have chosen to try and segregate children based upon.
The idea that the Catholic Church should not be allowed to lobby government when everyone else does is itself bigotted.
Of course. The views of all the electorate should be considered; if what is being proposed applies to the whole electorate.
I have no problem with gay catholics not marrying each other because they consider that against their religion. However, a catholic has no right to say/demand non-catholic gay people can’t get married. I like a beer; that doesn’t mean I think Muslims should be forced to drink it. Religion is a personal choice. People choose personally to follow the teachings of one and the rules apply only to those who choose to do that.
If people react badly to the views of a specific religion, it is typically not because that religion holds a specific view, but because it is trying to tell people not of that religion what to do. The catholic church has every right to preach to Catholics what the church says is ok and what’s not. It has no right whatsoever to tell everyone else what they can and can’t do (if it causes no harm to anyone). The same applies for the rest of society; it has no right to tell the catholic church it must perform gay marriages (which it is most definitely not) just as it has no right to force muslims to eat pork.
So why should some “humanists” feel they have the right to ram their world view down my childrens’ throats
No matter what we teach our children, they will make up their own minds in time about what they believe in and what they don’t. Secularists are just pragmatic and respectful of children. They see children as ‘small’ adults and treat them as such. My daughter will choose what she believes in of her own free will, just as your children will in time whether you’ve taught them all about Catholicism, sent them to a Catholic School… or not.
In my experience it’s not a good idea to hammer a religion into a child. Kids have a habit of rebelling against that when they become an adult. Better to say e.g. ‘Hey son, this is my religion and what it teaches. I’d be pleased if you follow it too but in the end, it is your choice for you are your own person’.
@kininvie
I do not see how an elected monarch would, except in name, be in any way different from an elected President-for-life. An elected monarch would be like the members of the House of Lords; only death can get rid of them, no matter rascally, corrupt or incompetent they prove to be. Personally I think that having a chance every few years to replace the incumbent head of state is a very good thing. Also, I think one of the serious flaws in the UK ‘constitution’ is that it puts far too much power in the hands of one person, the Prime Minister, and that there is a lot to be said for having an elected President who is not just a ceremonial figurehead.
@Dave McEwen Hill
I have complained to the Editor also. Would appreciate it if you would let us know if you get a reply.
I had a polite reply from the editor of the Catholic Observer to my complaint and letter. We’ll see if she publishes it.
In the meantime I’m sure she would appreciate a range of views at editor@sconews.co.uk.
“I had a polite reply from the editor of the Catholic Observer to my complaint and letter. We’ll see if she publishes it.
In the meantime I’m sure she would appreciate a range of views at editor@sconews.co.uk“
I have it on good authority that another SCO columnist will be taking issue with the piece in the week after next’s issue.
@gollygosh
I agree with the responses to your comment by Yodhrin and scottish_skier. Not advocating specific religious beliefs is not the same as advocating humanism or atheism. State-funded schools should simply be neutral with regards to religion – neither for or against it, but certainly not in favour of one particular version – just as they should be neutral with regards to party politics.
Think about how you would feel if this argument was about the right of parents who support Labour to send their children to Labour schools. After all, religion and politics are two issues which many feel strongly about, to the point where they are a key part of their identity, and which parents hope that their children will follow in their footsteps. If we do not need ‘political’ schools, why should we have ‘religious’ ones?
I have no words to describe my response to this, other than simply ‘eh?’
@Edward
In it we hear Richard Bacon, the MP for South Norfolk completely rubbish the idea that there would be border controls if Scotland became independent.
Why would a Tory MP in England be going out of his way to rubbish a BT claim about independence?… 😀 😀
I can sympathise with Hugh Dougherty about anti-Catholic/Irish prejudice in West Central Scotland. I worked in Glasgow many years ago, and was surprised by it; I had not noticed it in other parts of Scotland and, indeed, was instinctively inclined to admire the Irish for having won their independence from London rule. The prejudice seemed to me to be stupid and illogical for anyone who really considered himself or herself to be a Scot. After all, didn’t the original Scots come from Ireland, hasn’t everyone with a Mac surname certainly got ancient Irish ancestry, and wasn’t Scotland once a Catholic country, with some pockets, still. of the Highlands and Islands which were never touched by the Reformation?
But that was Glasgow, and that was then. It’s plain from other articles that Hugh Dougherty has written that he has resisted taking a Scottish identity all his life. It may be a lasting reaction to the prejudice, and it’s too late for him to change. But it has led him to a narrow and erroneous view of history and politics, and the construction of a dubious rationale to underpin it.
Alex Taylor, many thanks for your words of encouragment ( you may live tae regret them if I do get my Brain sorted LOL ) but many thanks to all who have posted in Public & in Private i only mention my condition because of spelling / wording ect If I get as bad as Johann / Anus in ranting to no effect please Tell Me I ll withdraw from posting comments WOS / YES SCOT / BELLA CAl / and all the other FREE SCOTLAND SITES are WEIL SERVED by the MORE EDUCATED ( unlike myself unedumacated ) but hay ho every little helps . YOU LOT LADS LASSES MAKE MA DAY /MANY THANKS TO YOU,S ALL RONNIE A
AH wonder if Mr Docherty would have been as greatfull to the British Establishment if they would have payed their FARES to AUSTRAILIA a hundred yrs ago. Jack Mc Connell brushed the shortcomings of the Catholic Church under the table ,did Mr D / SCO have concerns towards the Catholic people then ( dont think so THEY were discusseded the same as the wWHOLE population & continue to do so with the resent revelations & thro out All people in Scotland today are being treated as MORONS/UNEDUCATED at that. ARE they in for a DISAPPOINTMENT from ALL the peoples LIVING in SCOTLAND even the WEE GINGER DUG wi PINK or GREEN SPOTS or whatever HUE ,s YOUR CHOICE IS SAOR ALBA rant over I would have done that last nite but MICHIEL FLATLEYS Lifes Story wiz mair INTERESTING. MR DOCH I would recommend a TAP IN THE HEID ( shunt ) bit no before ah git mine ah use mine
Yodhrin
Thanks for your comments. There is no “neutral” position in any school. All schools, whether they set out to do it or not, transmit a world view and values to children. No education fails to do this.
In denominational schools it is done explicitly, which is better. Well better anyway than the delusion that it is not being done when in fact it is intrinsic to any education. All education is value laden. The expulsion of religion from schools is already a value decision. A pluralist society does not foist that on all its citizens and participants in state education.
What concerns me about reactions to Mr Dougherty’s article is remarks like those of BMC 875 at 5.08 on 4 Nov., for example.
You can agree or disagree with Mr Dougherty but he has every right to state his view as a Scot in Scotland.
Scottish Skier
Thank you. You seem to take an extreme liberal view in the sense that you think private acts do not have public consequences. Marriage in any case is a public act , defined in law and controlled by the State, which forbids marriage between certain persons, inter alia. Anyone in Scotland has a right to a say in the matter of the law on marriage and a right to campaign and lobby on it. The Catholic Church has a right to be heard on this issue. Others may disagree with it and refuse to follow it but as marriage is regulated by the law of the land it has a right to a hearing, as indeed the other churches, and others have.
AWE REV, Ah wiz movin on to the next story, n whit day YOU pit up A GUN TAE GOVANS HEID . I ll be gone tae Govan soon ah hope ( STH GEN ) are YOU tryin tae get SHOT O ME ( its a shunt STU ) who,s the moderater on here ANUS SARWAR he dizzna listen lo
@gollygosh -he does have every right to express his views, however by writing in the SCO which is avavilable in every catholic church, he is seeking to influence the views of others and not in an informed way.
As far as I am aware he is talking about Adelaide as being tolerant of religion whilst ignoring the disgraceful way in which the indigenous population are treated – see John Pilger for his views on that.
Is the catholic church happy that the UK demonises the poor, the sick and that glasgow has child poverty levels which a 3rd world country would be ashamed of.
And in case it escaped your notice the UK has already voted in favour of gay marriage.
I write this as a west of scotland catholic with 50% Irish ancestry.
As a Scottish Catholic of Irish heritage, I find that the viewpoint expressed in that article baffling but sadly not surprising. There are many Catholics of Mr Dougherty’s generation – particularly in the two Lanarkshires – who hold his views. I know them well. These people vote and need to be convinced somehow that an independent Scotland will not be a hotbed of bigotry and sectarianism. To non-Catholics this will sound utterly bizarre but please realise that there is a long folk memory in the Catholic community of when our grandparents and great-grandparents were discriminated against on a very real basis. As for his point about gay marriage, it is laughable and it saddens me that my coreligionists can spout such uncharitable waffle.
Gollygosh, A the mans a lier ( no political affiliations ) B having read the whole piece YES there is Religious hatred in Scotland West of Scotland more so but us shouting down people that start of in lie,ing gives no credit to the story I have many friends of all religions & non & many Furriners ( wee Mags ) but as with any society we get on in our daily lives
Liz
So he writes to influence others. So?
Do not millions of others do the same? Surely you do not object to him seeking to influence his fellow Catholics.
I disagree with him politically but I understand his position which cannot be dismissed by the simple charge of paranoia.
I am sure everything is not brilliant in Adelaide and could the Church do more for the poor?Well probably we all could.
How will remaining part of the union change the legislation for gay marriage. The union supports it as well ….
Misguided fellow.
@gollygosh- I see you have only answered part of my comment and missed out the bits you couldn’t defend.
I will repeat he is seeking to influence others not in an informed way.
The Westminster government has already supported gay marriage.
I prefer informed comments with proof and not someone’s ill informed opinion.
PS I never called him paranoid.
Gollygosh, ah did nt mention his Paranioa , ither thats like slapin masel roon the face wi a kipper , its one mans opinion , as a 63 yr young laddy av leart a few things in life ( dont feed me TRIPE an tell me its RUMP STEAK )
aNYBODY , Have a link tae they DEANS E MAILS T elegraph want subsription
Liz
I disagree that he is not informed. He is not a fool and he writes from his life experience. I think his conclusions are mistaken, however.
Our judgement about whether he is informed or not makes no difference to his right to seek to influence others.
On gay marriage and Westminster, you are right. That’s a fair point.
Can I point out that Hugh Dougherty does not speak for the Catholic Church which has nothing to do with Mr Dougherty’s unfortuate comments.
It should never be forgotten that Gordon Cardinal Gray was a member of the SNP and Thomas Cardinal Winning had a very warm relationship with Alex Salmond who had a column in the Catholic Newspaper for years.
The problem is that the editor of SCO has published a disreputable article, deeply insulting to Scotland and the Scots, which never should have been in the paper.
gollygosh
I think my primary objection to Hugh’s piece was the conflation of prejudice and the SNP ergo the Yes camp in total…so let’s vote No. He gave no evidence for his assumption that the SNP are in any way sectarian in nature. In fact any reasonable examination of the evidence would suggest that he is throwing his lot in with some of the most bigoted, sash singing Mason Boynes in the land. At the recent Yes rally in Edinburgh the James Connolly society marched with us. I don’t know if you saw any of the comments on the Unionist blogs and Facebook pages about the rally but honestly they made Wings look like a convention of Trappist Monks. Any comment here that may be somewhat testy in composition as a reaction to Hugh’s article has a hundred ready made antidotes over on the Better Together annals (many were just downright unpleasant and vile)
I thought Hugh’s comment about same sex marriage disingenuous precisely because the Westminster bill is on a similar time scale. No one is saying that the Churches cannot lobby, they have obtained an opt out in Scotland so in one sense the lobbying was successful. However, his complaint seems to be the Government ignored the Church’s demand that there be no same sex marriage at all. That sounds like demanding a veto on the matter. That simply isn’t going to happen in a secular society whether it is Spain, France, Scotland or increasing numbers of US States. That sort of call only seems to exist in autocratic societies like Russia or Iran..not Governments I would like to live under.
I’m sorry folks, too many posts to read before posting this. I cannot believe that this article was written this month never mind 40 years ago! Where the hell has this person been living in the last 40 years?
I have 3 Irish Grandparents and (obviously) 1 Scottish Grandparent. All 3 Irish Grandparents were Catholic and my wee Scottish granny was Church of Scotland (some of my ancestors were Free Church of Scotland).
I also have to say here that both my own and my husband’s family have several generations of “mixed” marriages (it really pains me to have put these words in print). Even now, almost 120-150 years later some cannot accept that love conquers all 🙂
Surely in this day and age people can make their up their own minds without any interference from churches?
Love conquers but there still will be eejits and bigots in every community all across the world. Sadly however Hugh Dougherty suggests the whole community of Scotland is bigoted against Catholics which is a national insult.
Dave McEwan Hill
There certainly are eejits and bigots in every community across the world and that is exactly what some people are trying desperately to eliminate. The Hugh Dougherty’s of this world are basically dinosaurs.
I would hope that few people in Scotland in 2013 are bigoted towards the Catholic community or any other (I’m going to say “minority'”) community. The outcome of the vote for the Independence Referendum should not be about religion
@gollygosh: Frankly, I think you are talking nonsense, unless you’re willing to define “value system” so broadly that it becomes meaningless.
Further, you are again misrepresenting the opposing argument, because nobody is talking about “expelling” religion from schools, they are talking about limiting it in exactly the same way all other subjects are limited, ie; presented in one dedicated part of the cirriculum instead of colouring every subject, and presented in a balanced and academic way as a subject for study not as an objective truth.
Making children sing hymns at Assembly every morning, forcing them to attend church services on certain holidays, and teaching science and history from a single, narrow perspective are not necessary or useful to the primary purpose of education, which is to provide children with a solid grounding in a broad range of subjects to enable them to forge a path for themselves. You can pretend that is a “world view” in order to support your ludicrous idea that religiously-motivated schooling is equivalent in all respects to secular schooling if you want, but thankfully reality is not defined by opinion.
Yodhrin
And what’s more it’s what their parents want! How dare their parents interfere in how their children are brought up. It’s not as if we live in a democracy,in which parents are responsible for their children, is it?
And it gets worse. They’re expected to be quiet in class, walk on the pavements, wear clothes and so on.
Bring back the USSR is what I say.
Imagine this was written by English folk living in Scotland….there would be outrage. I just find this hanging onto the peat by your holy fingernails a bit cringeworthy. It’s all a bit Aiden Mcgeedy.
By all means have an option that says No, but basing it on I’m really foreign although born here is quite bizarre. This is Scotland, don’t try to turn it into Ireland.
The article heading is quite wrong, he is more worried about the past than the future.
So Hugh Dougherty lives in the past, doesn’t like gays and believes in a magic man in the sky! Nuff said really.
Being a Catholic I felt I needed to read this from start to finish, Im still in bewilderment of this ceich