2 weeks Ago
Reading Michael Kelly’s thoughtful piece on the empathy at the heart of the Easter story (‘Empathy is crucial building block for creating a healthy and happy society’, Irish Independent , April 18) reminded me of a Lenten homily I once heard from a Catholic priest in the US. It was proof that even the most solemn seasons can benefit from a splash of humour and a waft of grilled meat. He told the story of John Smith, the only Protestant living in a devoutly Catholic neighbourhood.
Each Friday during Lent, while his neighbours gnawed dutifully on fish fingers and beanburgers, John fired up his barbecue and filled the street with the aroma of sizzling steaks. It was, understandably, a trial of faith for all. Eventually, in the spirit of Christian outreach (and possibly survival), the community persuaded him to convert.
There was great rejoicing, a splash of holy water, and the barbecue lay dormant. That is, until the following Lent, when again the unmistakable scent of grilled sirloin floated across the fence. The neighbours found John beside his barbecue, gently sprinkling water over the meat and intoning: “You were born a cow, you were raised a cow, but now.
.. you are a fish.
” Theologically questionable, yes, but perhaps a reminder that conversion, like empathy, must run deeper than mere ritual. In an age when public figures like Elon Musk dismiss empathy as a weakness and when many are more drawn to self-care than other-care, the Easter message has never felt more relevant. Whether in a Catholic ceremony in a warehouse in Pakistan or a suburban back garden with a cheeky steak, the invitation remains timeless: to think beyond ourselves and truly see the other.
Enda Cullen, Tullysaran, Armagh Denouncing Israeli war crimes is not antisemitic – to say so is deflection I have no time for antisemitism in its true sense, but according to the false and seemingly infinitely elastic definition of the term propounded by some, anyone who protests against Israel’s crimes against humanity, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, collective punishment and possible genocide, or attempts to hold Israel to account for same, is guilty of antisemitism. Such attempts at semantic alchemy are nothing short of Orwellian. They represent an obvious and cynical ploy to metamorphose the true meaning of the term in an attempt to deflect valid criticism of atrocities committed by Israel, the supposed bastion of liberal democracy in the Middle East.
They also devalue the term and demean those who have suffered genuine antisemitism. Is denouncing IRA atrocities anti-Catholic? Is denouncing UVF atrocities anti-Protestant? Is denouncing apartheid South Africa anti-white? Is denouncing atrocities committed by Islamist extremists – including Hamas – anti-Muslim? Denouncing Israeli war crimes, crimes against humanity, collective punishment and possible genocide is not antisemitic. If it did constitute antisemitism, the countless Jews across the world – including Israelis – who condemn the Israeli government’s atrocities are then by definition antisemitic, which of course is a nonsense.
No one should be fooled by the smokescreen of groundless charges of antisemitism employed in an attempt to deflect attention away from Israel’s crimes. T Rob Sadlier, Rathfarnham, Dublin 16 Commonwealth call a step too far, but release of files on bombings would help Conservative MP Andrew Rosindell, speaking in the House of Commons recently, called for Ireland to join countries such as Australia, Canada and New Zealand by choosing to take their “rightful place” in the family of the Commonwealth of Nations. Mr Rosindell said this would take the deep neighbourly relationship between Ireland and the UK to the next level, adding that it would be of benefit to global politics.
I believe the colonial relationship between Ireland and Britain – which has endured centuries of oppression, famine, war and terrorism – has not recovered sufficiently to consider a formal alliance other than our recent common EU membership. If Mr Rosindell wishes to further the relationship between Ireland and Britain, he might encourage the British government to release the files that were withheld from the Barron Inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan Bombings in 1974. Half-a-century has passed since the atrocity, with no resolution in sight.
The British government has ignored four all-party resolutions passed unanimously by Dáil Éireann, urging it to make relevant undisclosed documents available to an independent, international judicial figure. Tom Cooper, Templeogue, Dublin 6 Celebrities are not experts in seemingly one-sided debate on gender rights Why is it that when it comes to serious matters like sex-based rights, your coverage seems to lean so heavily on celebrity outrage? The recent piece on Nicola Coughlan’s reaction to the UK gender court ruling was disappointing – she is entitled to her view, of course – but it seems the Irish Independent is only platforming one side of this debate, largely from people whose fame is unrelated to the topic at hand. Just because someone can act or sing doesn’t make them an expert on legal rulings, child safeguarding or the consequences of eroding women’s boundaries.
The ruling in the UK was a sensible one: it simply upheld the reality that males should not be placed in female-only hospital wards. Surely women deserve the right to single-sex spaces – particularly when they are ill, vulnerable or dying? Where is the space in your coverage for the voices of women who have fought for these rights? For the detransitioners? For the mothers, nurses, survivors and legal experts who support this judgment? These voices exist – and they matter. Sarah Holmes, Newcastle, Co Wicklow Muted response from the Irish media on important UK supreme court ruling There has been a muted reaction from the Irish media and commentariat to the UK supreme court landmark ruling on gender identity.
I find this surprising, given that we are also a common-law jurisdiction and use UK judicial precedent widely in our own superior courts’ judgments. Larry Dunne, Rosslare Harbour, Co Wexford.
