EDITORIAL: This is why we don't protest against people

If you have a small child, I want you to look at them now. Imagine you need to take them somewhere safe.

You are in a situation, and you must leave. You have decided to take them out of school, away from their friends and family, the only home they have ever known.

But it isn’t safe for them, and you will do anything to protect them.

Now, imagine somebody has agreed to take you in. They will make sure you and your child are safe, you have a roof over your heads and you have enough to eat.

You don’t know specifically where you are going, but you are assured you and your child are safe.

As you arrive, there are a large group of adults outside your shelter. Some are being aggressive. Others are not. You can’t see who is who. You can’t see behind you or to your sides.

You try to watch everyone and move as fast as you can, but it’s impossible because everything is moving so fast, and you have your child in your arms.

But you get inside, and the door closes. Your child is crying and very frightened. They don’t understand what’s happening, and neither do you. So, you just try to comfort them and move forward.

In the days after your arrival, the crowd stays outside the door. They sing, maybe chant. They have lit a fire, and they are going nowhere.

Neither are you, for that matter, because anything could happen.  And no matter what, your child is certainly not going outside.

You don’t know when they will again.

The people of Roscrea have legitimate grievances and a right to protest.

But with that right comes the responsibility to do so in a way that causes the least amount of harm.

That is twice as true when children are involved.

Perhaps these questions need to be asked:

Is it necessary to occupy the grounds of the Racket Hall?

Is that where the decision-makers are?

And, how would you answer if it were you and your child?