I'm thinking about the topic of the next posts...
I would like to deal with a couple of topics, none of them (strictly) connected with politics: food facts and customization of personal computers.
It could sound weird, I have this matters in mind, but you know... I could write something about my electricity consumption mania, about my feeling sick when I open a book (more precisely, when I read a pic or a pdf file on my screen), about the sensation of stupidity when the vendor “changes” the vacuum flask with the same vacuum flask, and you realize only later... you mess everything up, and that's your fault, and you know it, but you hate when others make you notice that! That's human, I think.
Simply, I wanted to post something, today, and this “next steps” (!) is something, isn't it?
I've been told the BBC is quite conservative (tory): actually to see the UK premier criticized because he (or his secretary) misspelt a soldier's name makes me feel strange.I mean, that's right that the government is under scrutiny, but it seems to me they are using very silly arguments.. who knows. By the way, I don't really understand the media approach to the war and the British contribute to the conflict. All these people with the “puppy”, or what's its name... they seem to me to be a bit too rhetorical. And if I think about the “Army cadet” just here down the road, it makes me feel uneasy. This topic deserves further research: till now, I did not manage to discuss about it with British people: I tried twice, but the persons involved were not that “responsive”. I will try harder.
Ah, I forgot to say that the new leader of the Italian PD gave his contribute about the crucifix, on the same day I posted about it... he gave his worse, of course!
Wednesday, 11 November 2009
Tuesday, 3 November 2009
Lautsi VS crucifix: 1-0
The European Human Rights court deems the crucifix to be a religious symbol. Therefore it must not be displayed in Italian public schools, since it could trouble non-Christian pupils.
These communist Human Rights! How dare they? When did they ask the pope and the CEI whether they can say anything about the crucifix?
And by the way, the crucifix has other meanings, not only the religious one: it is a multi-purpose semantic artifact. It represents European traditions and culture, and Italian Christian identity, and Italian traditional tolerance. At least, some politicians (right wing, so far, but probably some of the best representatives of the left wing will do their best – or worst – to join them) said that the crucifix should do it. When they don't know what to say, they remind us of the “Christian roots of Europe” and that EU was created thanks to the efforts of 3 Catholics (I mean, I remember some clergyman saying it). But then we should hang on the wall also a picture of Charlemagne (pater Europae), something else (suggestions, please) to represent the Basque substratum of the European population, an item to recall the Romans and the Germans, the Celts, the Enlightement (which maybe made more for the unity of Europe than Christianity did), end so on.
To say the truth, Italians in general don't get what secular state means, the Vatican OBVIOUSLY would erase the word "secular" from the dictionary, the Italian politicians are too compromised with Catholic powers.
As Croce pointed out, in the Italian constitution there is (art. 7) an explicit reference to the Convention between the Vatican and Mussolini (Patti Lateranensi: the Vatican dealt with Fascist Italy, after denying any agreement to the previous liberal Italian governments): so to say, in the birth certificate of the Italian republic it is written that her relationships with a foreign power (which, by the way, is an antidemocratic theocracy where, as far as I know, death penalty is still legally possible, even if not used.. I should check, but I'm almost sure) are regulated by an agreement made before her foundation. I don't know if it makes sense to the reader, but that's a crap. Moreover, art. 7 shows what the actual situation: it is made clear that Italy and the Vatican are separated and independent entities; as if I had in my ID card “I am John Smith, and Joseph Black has nothing to do with me”... clearly something does't work!
All in all, inconsistency is as usual the main characteristic of Italy: that's a “secular state”, but also Christian; more precisely, Catholic, I don't know if it's clear what I mean. The public founding to public schools has been reduced “because of the crisis”, but the money given to the private (mainly Catholic) educational institutes hasn't been diminished (or maybe its amount has raised, I don't remember, now); if you want to be a teacher, there is a competition; but the “religion” teacher is picked from a list of candidates suggested by the Diocesis, and after some years he\she can ask to teach other subjects, de facto avoiding the procedure applied for “standard” teachers. Do you want other examples?
That's all, till now, I've got to pretend to study!
These communist Human Rights! How dare they? When did they ask the pope and the CEI whether they can say anything about the crucifix?
And by the way, the crucifix has other meanings, not only the religious one: it is a multi-purpose semantic artifact. It represents European traditions and culture, and Italian Christian identity, and Italian traditional tolerance. At least, some politicians (right wing, so far, but probably some of the best representatives of the left wing will do their best – or worst – to join them) said that the crucifix should do it. When they don't know what to say, they remind us of the “Christian roots of Europe” and that EU was created thanks to the efforts of 3 Catholics (I mean, I remember some clergyman saying it). But then we should hang on the wall also a picture of Charlemagne (pater Europae), something else (suggestions, please) to represent the Basque substratum of the European population, an item to recall the Romans and the Germans, the Celts, the Enlightement (which maybe made more for the unity of Europe than Christianity did), end so on.
To say the truth, Italians in general don't get what secular state means, the Vatican OBVIOUSLY would erase the word "secular" from the dictionary, the Italian politicians are too compromised with Catholic powers.
As Croce pointed out, in the Italian constitution there is (art. 7) an explicit reference to the Convention between the Vatican and Mussolini (Patti Lateranensi: the Vatican dealt with Fascist Italy, after denying any agreement to the previous liberal Italian governments): so to say, in the birth certificate of the Italian republic it is written that her relationships with a foreign power (which, by the way, is an antidemocratic theocracy where, as far as I know, death penalty is still legally possible, even if not used.. I should check, but I'm almost sure) are regulated by an agreement made before her foundation. I don't know if it makes sense to the reader, but that's a crap. Moreover, art. 7 shows what the actual situation: it is made clear that Italy and the Vatican are separated and independent entities; as if I had in my ID card “I am John Smith, and Joseph Black has nothing to do with me”... clearly something does't work!
All in all, inconsistency is as usual the main characteristic of Italy: that's a “secular state”, but also Christian; more precisely, Catholic, I don't know if it's clear what I mean. The public founding to public schools has been reduced “because of the crisis”, but the money given to the private (mainly Catholic) educational institutes hasn't been diminished (or maybe its amount has raised, I don't remember, now); if you want to be a teacher, there is a competition; but the “religion” teacher is picked from a list of candidates suggested by the Diocesis, and after some years he\she can ask to teach other subjects, de facto avoiding the procedure applied for “standard” teachers. Do you want other examples?
That's all, till now, I've got to pretend to study!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)