Jump to content

 

 

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'religion'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Main Forums
    • Rangers Chat
    • General Football Chat
    • Bluenose Lounge
    • Forum Support and Feedback

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Location


Interests


Occupation


Favourite Rangers Player


Twitter


Facebook


Skype

  1. I've had two legal letters sent to me via email by Biggart Baillie on behalf of the Rangers board and Brian Stockbridge over comments I made about him lying. They are threatening a civil defamation action. One came on Friday and one today. Meanwhile, Macgiollabhain, Galloway, Haggerty, Greenslade and CQN can say whatever they like about the club and the fans without any risk of the board lifting a finger to defend either. They are an absolute disgrace. Their attempts to silence dissension both through the action against FF and me is a clear attempt to bully, using the fans ST money to pay for it. I'll be making more detailed comment on it over the next couple of days.
  2. I was wondering if any Gersnetters knew the name of Jum Spence's 'zine? He founded and Edited it for several years and his current designation at BBC Scotland is as a direct result of this particular publication. It was a case of BBC Scotland wanting to be seen to embrace the new media. I would like to peruse a copy/copies to how Jum referred to Rangers and Rangers supporters? Further, as Editor; what content was approved?
  3. http://www.therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/current-affairs/282-jim-spence-rangers-jibes I won't post the article as there are a few images used at the link for context... Suffice to say, poor Jum gets nailed by an on-form Chris...
  4. An excellent introduction from an American fan on how he grew to love Rangers... http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/latest-news/159-we-the-going-gets-tough-the-tough-get-going I suspect that my road to becoming a Rangers supporter is quite unlike most of those who pack into Ibrox on any given Saturday. My first shirt wasn’t a wee Rangers strip. Nor I did not grow up with posters of Souness and McCoist on my walls. I’m actually quite positive that until I discovered the club and its history, my father had no idea that one could play football professionally. Growing up “across the pond,” my early years were full of baseball, basketball, and the American version football; which, as most of you know, doesn’t really involve the feet at all. I played football, mostly as a goalkeeper, when I was young, because that was the “cool” thing to do if you grew up in suburban America in the 1990s. Everything changed, however, when I was 14, and our family spent most of the summer living in Ayr. Being a typical American “Scotophile,” my Dad felt it to be a wonderful idea to switch houses, cars, and jobs with a local pastor in the Church of Scotland. And while I was excited to escape the country for a few weeks, I honestly felt the whole trip would be rather boring and an overall waste of time. Then I did some reading. After doing a bit of research, I became relatively well versed - at least for an American teenager - about the history of Scottish football, and of course, the Old Firm. The accessible, white bread version told me I had two choices. One was to support a Catholic side, the other was to support a Protestant side. Positively without malicious intent, I sided with Rangers simply because I knew that I didn’t go to mass on Sunday. This was followed by discarding every piece of green clothing that I was planning on bringing to Scotland, a few deep breaths, and quite a long plane ride. In the ensuing eight weeks, however, I realized that religion was merely one piece of the puzzle. And I went from a casual bystander, to a downright obsessive fan. I quickly learned that there was a Rangers shop conveniently located in the Ayr city center - to which my mother dutifully drove me at least twice a week, and where I bought anything I could afford. We visited Ibrox and took the tour where I got my first glimpse at the well-stocked trophy room, walked through the tunnel and sat in the dugout. I also bought two strips. One in the traditional home blue, and the other in the now infamous shade of neon orange. I’m pretty sure that those were the only two shirts I wore for the remainder of the trip. When we arrived home, my bedroom was quickly decorated with pin up of Barry Ferguson, a bright blue Rangers rug, and about any other image relating to the club that I could print off of the trusty inkjet printer. Yet it wasn’t merely a childhood fascination with something new that drove my fandom so far, so fast. Even at that age, I could sense that there was something about different about both football fans in general, and Rangers supporters in particular. In the U.S., we use the term “pink hat” quite often to describe a fan whose devotion to a team is extremely fickle and shallow. It was originally connoted with fans of the Boston Red Sox, my local baseball team, who preferred donning pink, rhinestone encrusted versions of the typical team t-shirts and hats, rather than the traditional red and blue. They typically knew nothing about the team or their run of form. They just showed up at games, hoped to get on the big screens, and in the process typically acted like complete and utter idiots. I’m sure that many season ticket holders would disagree with me, but at first glance, being a Rangers fan meant so much more than simply attending football matches. Rangers was a culture, a religion if you will. This was not simply what one did every few Saturdays. It wasn’t simply what colour scarf or top you preferred wearing. Rangers was and is a way of life, that’s been passed down through the generations. It’s a fervour that only those on the inside can understand. And across social classes, neighbourhoods, and countries, it’s a moniker that brings thousands, if not millions of people together. When I travelled back to Scotland to study at the University of Edinburgh, all I had to do was reach out to my local RSC, and I was immediately embraced as part of that exquisite Rangers family. No one on the bus to Ibrox glanced uneasily at the lanky kid from America, but allowed me to join in the songs, the banter, and the many, many pints, as a neighbour and friend. We were all brought together by a club we loved, and simply that was enough. While my story may seem rather cliché, and a bit kitschy, it’s extremely pertinent to the situation we as Rangers find ourselves in today. It’s no mistake that as the extent of Craig Whyte’s damage became more and more apparent; one of the first rallying cries the support drummed up was #RangersFamily. When our club was threatened from the outside, we turned inward to tap the collective power of the millions of supporters across the globe, reminding each other that together, as one Rangers family, we’re unbeatable and certainly don’t do walking away. Yet, as the months have lagged on, and our collected friends in the media take their swipes at this proud club, a lot of us have forgotten the reason why Rangers means so much to us. Instead of remembering the true meaning and power of the Rangers Family, we’ve found it more constructive to start splitting hairs, and fighting amongst each other. I for one, can’t see how this serves any type of a constructive purpose. Of course it’s important that we stay informed as a support, weed out misinformation, and ensure that those who will take the reins at Ibrox and Auchenhowie are not only capable, but equally passionate about Rangers and all that it means to each and every one of us. Debate is good when it remains positive and constructive, and I certainly do not propose the stifling of these conversations under the guise of phony unity. But when every single opinion, dutifully researched and written, is immediately attacked for being “against the best interest of the club,” or its author is said to not be a true fan, or worse, a Tim in disguise, then we truly lose sight of what’s important in times such as these. It’s realizing that no matter our different opinions on the road we must take to get there, we all love Rangers immensely, and understand that the club is better when we as the support present a strong, united front. What hooked me on Rangers, and what keeps me excited for its future is that collective spirit and energy that takes a mass of supporters and shapes them into what we know to be the Rangers Family. It was the sense that the club’s history and values would live on through the years, and would eventually triumph despite whatever obstacles would stand in our way. This is what we must remember as the tabloids continue to print stories of shady boardroom tactics, or as we get taken to court by those who pretend to have our best interests at heart. Because when the dust settles, and it will eventually settle, we will all, as Rangers, be better for it. The future will be taxing (no pun intended). But when the going gets tough, the tough get going. That’s why WE are the people.
  5. FOOTBALL fans who peddle internet hate will still get the red card under tough new anti-bigotry laws â?? but only if their messages are deemed to be THREATENING. The change to the SNP's anti-sectarian Bill came yesterday after Nat chiefs added a clause protecting freedom of expression. It now means that messages containing insults or abusing religious beliefs will NOT be against the law â?? but those considered likely to cause public disorder or threaten people WILL. The clause also doesn't apply to sectarian or threatening behaviour at and around football games â?? which will also be deemed illegal. Last night Community Safety Minister Roseanna Cunningham,tasked with steering the legislation through Parliament, said: "The intention of the amendment is not to prevent legitimate religion discussion and debate. "It aims to prevent the kind of communication we saw last football season when individuals were threatened with serious harm. "It is important that we remember that's what this is about." The clause to the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill was backed by MSPs on Holyrood's Justice Committee in a vote yesterday â?? despite Labour members James Kelly and Graeme Pearson REFUSING to take part. It also received a lukewarm response from human rights experts. But last night Shadow Justice Minister Mr Kelly again blasted the Bill â?? and called for it to be scrapped. Earlier he and Mr Pearson abstained from every single vote on almost 40 amendments during the vital second of three stages needed for it to become law. The move infuriated Glasgow MSP Humza Yousaf, who represents the SNP on the Justice Committee. He said: "You cannot simply opt out of debating or discussing the whole of a piece of legislation, especially one as important as this. "This Bill is significant and, whether people are in favour of it or opposed to it, they were let down by their Labour MSPs â?? they may as well have stayed at home." But Mr Kelly defended his actions â?? and repeated his claim that the Bill was not "fit for purpose". He said he abstained in protest after the Government "failed to engage" with critics about issues surrounding the legislation. And he vowed his Labour colleagues would turn out in force to vote against it when it comes back for consideration in front of the whole Scottish Parliament. He said: "The reason we abstained was to give ministers time to reflect on the legislation and call a halt to the Bill. "As it currently stands we do not believe it is fit for purpose and Parliament should not be asked to pass bad law. "We want the SNP to withdraw this Bill and take more time to discuss the problems of sectarian behaviour with all interested parties." Mr Kelly's criticisms were backed by Green MSP Patrick Harvie. He said: "I'm still not convinced that this Bill can be fixed â?? its flaws are too deep. "Ministers are stubbornly determined to force it through in the teeth of consistent and reasoned opposition from all quarters, inside and outside Parliament. Parliament as a whole will have one more chance to address some of the most obvious problems with it. "I hope that colleagues in other parties will be ready to discuss how to achieve that before the legislation's final stage." The plans were first introduced following a series of bust-ups and sectarian incidents last season which shamed Scottish football. A host of Old Firm stars â?? including Celtic boss Neil Lennon â?? were also targeted in online rants by web thugs. But the Bill has since faced huge opposition from football clubs, fans' group, church leaders and legal experts, who have all voiced their concerns. Under it, the SNP propose two new offences. The first targets sectarian and threatening behaviour at and around football matches â?? which is deemed likely to cause public disorder. The second relates to threats or serious harm which are intended to stir up religious hatred on the internet or other communications. Those convicted under the legislation could spend up to five years in prison â?? and be banned from football grounds. Another change made by the committee widens part of the Bill to include people not necessarily travelling to a football match. Last night Mairi Clare Rodgers, director of media relations for human rights campaign group Liberty, still voiced her concerns. She said: "We welcome this admission from the Scottish Government that its Bill is chilling to free speech. But the offences it contains remain dangerously broad and a nightmare for police to enforce. "We look forward to further sensible amendment. It's one thing to incite violence, quite another to cause offence." A Rangers spokesman said: "Rangers welcomes the fact the Scottish Government has recognised legitimate freedom of expression is to be protected in the proposed new bill. "We are also supportive of tackling threatening behaviour on the internet. Our overarching concern about any legislation or effort to tackle anti-social behaviour is that it is applied evenly and fairly and does not stigmatise football supporters unjustly." A spokesman for Celtic said: "We have made our position quite clear and believe that the current legislation is already in place to tackle the issues which the proposed Bill aims to address." myView By COLM DEMPSEY, Defence Lawyer THIS is a positive change to the Bill â?? but concerns remain as to whether it is sufficiently succinct. You could still have cases where one person's freedom of expression is another person's offensive behaviour. For example, songs that one person may think are political or simply an expression of freedom could be considered threatening by someone else. There needs to be more clarification to eliminate any potential ambiguity. These will eventually be matters for the court â?? but the more uncertainty and questions are squared away, the better. Read more: http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/3953640/New-twist-in-bid-to-tackle-sectarianism.html#ixzz1eW0htd9S
  6. THE removal of a 300-year-old law that prevents Catholics from taking the throne is to be the focus of a controversial debate at Holyrood this week. MSPs are to discuss whether the Act of Settlement, drawn up by the English parliament in 1701 amid much furore in Scotland, has become out of date and discriminatory on sectarian grounds. While the heads of 16 Commonwealth states recently agreed to modernise some of the legislation â?? such as allowing first-born daughters to succeed as monarch â?? the issue of faith has not been addressed. Earlier this month Prime Minister David Cameron announced the UK Government planned to scrap the ban on the spouse of a Roman Catholic from becoming king or queen â?? but only a Protestant can take the throne. FREE NEWS UPDATES 24/7...FOLLOW THE SCOTTISH EXPRESS ON TWITTER The Scottish Parliament will now debate the issue, following a motion from Nationalist MSP Jim Eadie who said the 1701 Act was an â??ancient anachronismâ?. It will be the second time in 12 years Holyrood has discussed royal succession, after a debate in 1999 concluded the Act had â??no place in modern societyâ?. Papers released under Freedom of Information two years ago revealed then First Minister Donald Dewar felt the ancient ban on Catholics was â??no longer acceptableâ? in society but had grave doubts over whether it would ever change. In a Cabinet briefing paper he told colleagues that abolishing the 1701 Act of Settlement might even be impossible and said its repeal would create an uncontrollable â??ripple effectâ? through the constitution, and â??certainlyâ? lead to the disestablishment of the Church of England. Mr Eadieâ??s motion at Holyrood has already received crossbench support from both Labour and Liberal Democrat MSPs but as a reserved matter, only David Cameronâ??s administration can amend legislation relating to the royals. Speaking ahead of Wednesdayâ??s debate, the SNP MSP said: â??It is a disappointment that while some discrimination is being removed, steps have not been put in place to end the bar on a Catholic becoming monarch. While there are not that many people with the prospect of becoming monarch there should be no discrimination in any of our institutions on the grounds of religion. â??The concerns of other faiths could certainly be met, as they have been in the case of marriage and gender and I hope all parties will once again endorse this call to lift the bar and end this discrimination.â? The 1701 Act of Settlement ensured the Crown did not fall into Catholic hands after the death of Queen Anne, and stated: â??Any person reconciled with the See or Church of Rome, or who shall marry a Papist, shall be excluded and be for ever incapable to inherit, possess or enjoy the Crown.â? In Scotland the parliament drafted an alternative piece of legislation, called the 1704 Act of Security, which demanded the line of succession be given to the descendants of the Scottish kings instead. However, as part of the Union three years later, Scotland was forced to abandon its own Act or face trade sanctions. http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/284863/Holyrood-to-debate-lifting-ban-on-Catholics-taking-throne
  7. November 5th, 2011 | Author: Gerry The Power of Black and White Scotland Gerry Hassan The Scotsman, November 5th 2011 Scottish political debate is characterised and marred by a host of difficult divides and fractures. There is anti-Nationalist Labour hatred; the rage of the so-called â??cybernatsâ??; and a widespread, almost national sport of anti-Toryism. All of these are part of a Scottish problem which we see not only in our politics, but also across society, culture and football. Why do large parts of the Labour Party so virulently hate the SNP? And why do part of the Nationalist community, â??the cybernatsâ?? think it appropriate to conduct themselves the way they do? The former have used a politics of fear and negativity for years against the Nationalists, while the latter believe they are taking a stand against an omnipotent unionist establishment which is biased against them. We can look for answers in each tradition. Labour until this year saw one of their main tasks as defending the self-preservation society they had built. In Scottish nationalism there is commonly a sense of self-righteousness and belief in one â??trueâ?? way. One reason regularly put forward for the vitriol is the lack of substantive difference between Labour and SNP bar independence. Something more is at work than this. I think that part of the problem is that Labour and SNP, even beyond the zealots on each side, donâ??t understand each other and so donâ??t understand what motivates their political passions and involvement. This is why they find it easy to attribute negative motivations to their opponents. Whatâ??s more, there is a profound asymmetry between the two in that Labour, the long dominant culture, has reacted with fury to being challenged by what it regards as the Nationalist interlopers who have dared to intrude into what were once â??Labourâ??s natural heartlandsâ??. In my view, Labourâ??s detestation of the Nationalists is found at all levels of the party, whereas the manic hatred of Labour seen in â??the cybernatsâ?? is found at the margins of the party. Labour misjudgement and caricaturing of the Nationalists can be seen everywhere â?? in Iain Grayâ??s latest whinge, Ian Davidson â??s â??neo-fascistâ?? comments, Douglas Alexander, Gordon Brown and about any Labour figure you care to mention. This picture is part of a wider story. We can see a similar pattern in the relationship of Rangers and Celtic, the former the long established dominant club and culture, the latter, seen as the imposters, â??alienâ?? and â??illegitimateâ??. The records of violence, abuse and even tragically deaths connected to â??the Old Firmâ?? isnâ??t balanced between the two, but of predominantly Rangers fans doing violence to Celtic fans; which doesnâ??t excuse the excesses and idiocies of some Celtic fans. The sheer volume of hatred, aggression and anger coming from one quarter in particular, seems to be something the current sectarian bill has failed to grasp. Yet, this is what dominant cultures do when under threat and their once unquestioned writ no longer runs. All of this in our politics and society can be linked to the absence of empathy across swathes of Scotland, damaged, bruised relationships, and an aggressive, masculine language of violence across society, as well as actual violence making Scotland a more violent country than our European neighbours. While we believe we are a friendly, warm, welcoming people, the other side of our society is a shaming record of violence, crime and alcohol abuse which is off the record compared to others. Some of this echoes Carol Craigâ??s analysis in â??The Scotsâ?? Crisis of Confidenceâ??, just reprinted in a revised second edition. She argues that it is commonplace for people to be labeled and judged â??worthlessâ?? and traces this back to Scotlandâ??s religious past and the division into the â??savedâ?? and the â??damnedâ??. I donâ??t think it is an accident that the Rangers v. Celtic divide originated around religion, and that the Labour v. SNP fissure often feels like a throw back to Scotlandâ??s embattled religious sects. There is the need for action in politics. Mike Small, writing in the pro-nationalist â??Bella Caledoniaâ??, said that a debate of â??cybernats v. cyberbritsâ?? was not only quaint given the prevalence of the internet, but also â??a boring gameâ??. Small argues that we desperately need to develop non-party bases for ideas to widen out the debate which has become phenomenally narrow, insular and focused on a political class. And he rightly points to the need for the SNP to change gear in this new environment and have the confidence to engage in a degree of self-criticism, which would ultimately strengthen, not weaken the Nationalist cause. We have to go much further than that. There is a whole host of men behaving badly across Scotland (and some women) and we have to stop colluding with it, allowing it to flourish by silence and evasion, and address it head on. We have to be capable of more than the current disfigurement of much of our society. Arenâ??t our political traditions capable of more than reflecting cliché and stereotype? Would it not aid the Labour Party if it recognised that the Scottish Nationalists have been a force for good in our nation these last forty years, and stopped using a pejorative, negative language of â??separatismâ?? and â??separationâ??? And given that this is the finest hour so far of the Scottish Nationalists, would it not aid a generous, pluralist, dynamic vision of an independent Scotland, if they were to tell the cyber-thought police to shut up? It is fascinating to reflect that even writing the above carries with it a slight feeling of foreboding for what some of our vociferous political tribalists might say, but we have to challenge them. It is understandable that so many people want to cling to a rigid sense of certainty in a turbulent, complex world, but in so doing they only aid a politics of insularity, conformity and conservatism. Such characteristics donâ??t really help Scotland address the kind of challenges we are going to have to face and open up public debate and discussion. Black and White Scotland, the voices of a monochrome world are damaging themselves, their own well-being, the rest of us, our society and our prospect for creating a different, collective future. The campaign for a Scottish self-government which is meaningful, taking a stand against the authoritarian mindsets found across society, and a dynamic, outgoing public culture, are all part of the same canvas and debate.
  8. FIREBRAND politician George Galloway has called for jurors to be screened for bigotry in the wake of Neil Lennon’s Tynecastle court case. He says there should be checks to find out whether jury members are “tainted” by an affiliation to certain football teams, organisations such as Freemasons or are religiously motivated in any way. The Record columnist and former MP outlines his views in a new version of his book on the Celtic boss, who will return to Tynecastle for his team’s match against Hearts tomorrow. In an added chapter on the trial of Hearts fan John Wilson in the book Open Season: The Neil Lennon Story, Galloway calls for a thorough jury screening procedure. A passage in the new chapter reads: “In England and Wales, juries in criminal cases are directed to reach a unanimous decision and it’s only after hours of deliberation and when that can’t be reached – a hung jury – that the judge will allow a majority decision. “That’s not the case in Scotland, where a simple majority suffices as long as eight jurors agree. What the commentariat didn’t postulate is that a majority of the jury themselves were ‘aggravated by religious prejudice’. “Unlike what you see in American courtroom dramas, Scottish procedure couldn’t be more different. There is not the same scrutiny of prospective jurors, or elaborate questioning of them prior to the trial with the right of peremptory challenges and exclusions.” Further on, Galloway states: “Questioning the prospective jurors about their religion, football teams, Masonic association and the like would have been totally relevant here. “It’s clear to me that a crucial number of the jury were motivated by religious prejudice and Lennon suffered as a Northern Ireland Catholic, and proud of it. Hence the striking out of the ‘aggravation’ element of the charge then the stunning not proven verdict on assault.” The new edition of the book is published next week as the Scots government’s proposed anti-sectarianism legislation is reviewed at committee stage. Wilson, 26, was cleared of a sectarian assault on Lennon but sentenced to eight months in jail for breach of the peace. He was accused of a sectarian attack on the football boss as his side played Hearts in a league game at Tynecastle in May. The jury at Edinburgh Sheriff Court said the charge against Wilson, from the city, was not proven despite him admitting that he had struck Lennon on the head during the incident. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2011/10/01/george-galloway-calls-for-courts-to-screen-public-for-bigotry-86908-23458717/ TIT of a man.I'm offended by that,can I press charges?.Can the jurors not sue him for slander,defamation of charachter?
  9. Yet again sports throws up a remarkable story. A 17-year-old Gaelic football-playing Catholic from Northern Ireland has signed professional soccer forms with Glasgow Rangers, for so long a bastion of Protestantism and still the favoured team of people of that religion in the province. In the world of professional sport personal beliefs or backgrounds matter little ââ?¬â?? except perhaps to the die-hard fans. Talent is the common currency and young Aaron McGregor displays plenty of that. Let us hope that he fulfils his promise and becomes the soccer equivalent of our other bright young star, Rory McIlroy. Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/viewpoint/editors-viewpoint-let-his-star-shine-16014732.html#ixzz1Q0crjUIc
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.