Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Stop family from giving a religious funeral

2

Comments

  • #52
    lazygal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Pherekydes wrote: »
    There is a thread set up specifically to give feedback on the forum. It's called A&A feedback.

    Having said that, this is a forum for atheists and agnostics. We don't harass anyone about their beliefs. We discuss topics that we find interesting or important.

    Also, to describe someone as believing in nothing is quite incorrect, but to then further conflate that with them having no opinion is just provocatively offensive.

    For the record, we tend to believe in facts and testable hypotheses and evidence.

    And if you stick around you'll find we have opinions on everything!

    Does this mean we're allowed to discuss Hawaiian pizzas again????


  • #53
    Shrap
    Registered Users Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    lazygal wrote: »
    Does this mean we're allowed to discuss Hawaiian pizzas again????

    Hawaiian pizzas FTW!! YUM. All hail the Hawaiian, in all it's pineappley goodness.






    Sorry, any excuse to nail my colours to the mast....


  • #54
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,696 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Cantremember wrote: »
    Starting in reverse order:
    Extraordinary to see a supernaturalist claim that "atheists are allowed". Very revealing.

    What’s extraordinary about it? What does it reveal? Did you, until now, suppose the religious believers all held atheists to be incapable of sentiment, feeling, or common humanity? If you did believe that, I’m very pleased to have revealed the truth to you.

    Cantremember wrote: »
    f course how you are remembered won't affect you either once you're dead because you won't know. The point is that the arrogance of a religion that can reclaim someone's funeral and claim to have some magical effect of interceding with a god through its words when the dead person regarded that stuff as nonsense, that arrogance is mind boggling.

    People believe something that you don’t believe that that’s arrogant? Forming your own opinions, and not subjecting them to the prior approval of Cantremember and those who think like him is arrogant now?

    Are you sure you’re not some kind of fifth columnist, whose objective is to make atheists look insecure?

    Cantremember wrote: »
    It's not irrational to wish that your human body be disposed of as you wish: it simply extends the oppostion to supernaturalists to the disposal of your remains.

    Ah, but by the time his funeral comes along it won’t be his human body, will it? Because, of course, dead people - non-existent people - can’t own or possess things. It will just be a disintegrating collection of molecules; if it belongs to anybody at all, which I doubt, it certainly won’t belong to a non-existing being like the late OP. What happens to it cannot affect the OP in any way, on account of him not existing.

    Which is why I say that from one perspective worrying about your own funeral is irrational. And I am not the first person in this thread to make the point; similar sentiments are expressed here and here and here and here. And as far as I know none of those posters are believers. By contrast with them, I’m quite sympathetic to the OP; I understand why he wants the funeral he wants, and I think he should have it. I am genuinely puzzled as to why you react so angrily to that.



  • #55
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,533 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Ditch the FONT and COLOR tags will you??
    Peregrinus wrote: »
    People believe something that you don’t believe that that’s arrogant? Forming your own opinions, and not subjecting them to the prior approval of Cantremember and those who think like him is arrogant now?

    You completely misinterpret, or at least pretend to. Cantremember's post isn't hard to understand. The key words which you chose to ignore were when the dead person regarded that stuff as nonsense.

    It absolutely is arrogant, off the arrogance scale, busting the arrogance meter, to attempt to provide religious ritual to a deceased person who rejected it in life. It is disrespect of the worst order to the deceased and how they chose to live their life.

    If you can't or won't see that, there is zero point discussing the topic of this thread with you.

    Scrap the cap!



  • #56
    Dionysius2
    Registered Users Posts: 342 ✭✭Dionysius2


    The great trust we had as a nation in religion has been destroyed. That's what comes through to me big time in this thread on body disposal.
    And a huge amount of the damage was inflicted by the enemy within, i.e. the church and it's 'chosen' representatives. The pursuit of religious ideals is bizarre too from time to time as shown by this person's family in the pursuit of their idea of religious respect. It is reminiscent in some ways of the madness of the dissidents in the NIreland situation.....i.e. they will seek to deliver a united country through mindless murder, maimings, criminal acts, utter chaos and the like regardless of what the majority feel should happen.
    As regards the OP in this instance......he/she must tell all the close relatives of the preference for body disposal. If those people exist in numbers then methinks you will be more likely to have your wish fulfilled. Methinks most families would not risk a row in denying the request.


  • #57
    Cantremember
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,305 ✭✭✭Cantremember


    Peregrinus wrote: »

    What’s extraordinary about it? What does it reveal? Did you, until now, suppose the religious believers all held atheists to be incapable of sentiment, feeling, or common humanity? If you did believe that, I’m very pleased to have revealed the truth to you.


    People believe something that you don’t believe that that’s arrogant? Forming your own opinions, and not subjecting them to the prior approval of Cantremember and those who think like him is arrogant now?

    Are you sure you’re not some kind of fifth columnist, whose objective is to make atheists look insecure?


    Ah, but by the time his funeral comes along it won’t be his human body, will it? Because, of course, dead people - non-existent people - can’t own or possess things. It will just be a disintegrating collection of molecules; if it belongs to anybody at all, which I doubt, it certainly won’t belong to a non-existing being like the late OP. What happens to it cannot affect the OP in any way, on account of him not existing.

    Which is why I say that from one perspective worrying about your own funeral is irrational. And I am not the first person in this thread to make the point; similar sentiments are expressed here and here and here and here. And as far as I know none of those posters are believers. By contrast with them, I’m quite sympathetic to the OP; I understand why he wants the funeral he wants, and I think he should have it. I am genuinely puzzled as to why you react so angrily to that.


    LOL. I left it to another to point out your deliberate twisting of what I wrote. :D


  • #58
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,179 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    The place that does cremations in Dublin with whatever ceremony you want seems ideal. No religious stuff, I have a speech for my mate to read, let anyone else say something if they wish, let people say goodbye and 'poof' in a cloud of smoke.

    At the OP if you have a funeral director chosen ( my parents seem to believe alot of people have this done before hand, I don't, ) leave your explicit instructions with them and tell your next of kin that they are handling the funeral arrangements.


  • #59
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,696 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    Ditch the FONT and COLOR tags will you??
    I don’t put them in. (And I don't see them on my owns screen. If I did, I would remove them.) Blame effing Microsoft, for whom a special circle in hell is reserved.
    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    You completely misinterpret, or at least pretend to. Cantremember's post isn't hard to understand. The key words which you chose to ignore were when the dead person regarded that stuff as nonsense.

    It absolutely is arrogant, off the arrogance scale, busting the arrogance meter, to attempt to provide religious ritual to a deceased person who rejected it in life. It is disrespect of the worst order to the deceased and how they chose to live their life.

    If you can't or won't see that, there is zero point discussing the topic of this thread with you.
    I do see the disrespect that you mention. But I think it’s reasonable to ask how this disrespect can possibly injure somebody who doesn’t exist? And why should we worry about something that cannot possibly injure us?


  • #60
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,696 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Cantremember wrote: »
    LOL. I left it to another to point out your deliberate twisting of what I wrote. :D
    That was probably wise of you. :D


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    SparkySpitfire
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭SparkySpitfire


    I dunno, but if I die soon, I want my organs donated and I'd like to be cremated.

    Whether that's done in a religious ceremony or a secular one makes no odds to me. I spend my life learning about other cultures, funerary rites are for the LIVING, not the dead. This is a reoccurring theme. I'm an atheist and my family are Catholic but at the end of the day, I'll be dead. They're the ones dealing with their grief, not me. I wouldn't be so cruel to them to dictate how they should mourn me. How can you actually tell someone you love, what way to grieve?


  • #62
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,533 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    I do see the disrespect that you mention. But I think it’s reasonable to ask how this disrespect can possibly injure somebody who doesn’t exist? And why should we worry about something that cannot possibly injure us?

    Ah, the 'sure what's the harm' argument.

    Would you say that if it were christians being denied their desired form of funeral?

    Scrap the cap!



  • #63
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    This appears to be one of those topics summarised by this:

    Is the person religious?
    Yes: Respect their beliefs or your a militant atheist asshole.
    No: Why does it matter? Just go along with it.


  • #64
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,696 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    Ah, the 'sure what's the harm' argument.

    Would you say that if it were christians being denied their desired form of funeral?
    I've said, explicitly and repeatedly, that I understand why the OP wants the kind of funeral he does, and that I think he should have it. You're coming across here as someone who won't take "yes" for an answer.

    If a Christian didn't get his desired form of funeral, I'd say that's every bit as bad as the OP not getting the funeral he wants. Happy with that?

    My point has been that it's worth exploring why it should matter that the OP gets the funeral he wants. And since a number of atheists contributed to this thread before I came in, suggesting that it didn't matter and that the OP shouldn't worry about it, I don't think you can frame this as a believer/unbeliever clash.

    To my mind, there are solid nontheist humanist arguments as to why the OP should have the funeral he wants. But when I invite people to explore those, to lay them out, what I get is chip-on-shoulder complaints about arrogance and disrepect. Is there nothigng positive to be said about this?


  • #65
    Caprica6
    Closed Accounts Posts: 706 ✭✭✭Caprica6


    If you contact the college they cab advise you how to donate yourself to them I think its through your will


  • #66
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    If a Christian didn't get his desired form of funeral, I'd say that's every bit as bad as the OP not getting the funeral he wants. Happy with that??

    Just to be totally certain - you don't think that there's any problem at all with a religious person being given a non-religious funeral, and that anyone who would get annoyed about it should get over it.
    Peregrinus wrote: »
    My point has been that it's worth exploring why it should matter that the OP gets the funeral he wants. And since a number of atheists contributed to this thread before I came in, suggesting that it didn't matter and that the OP shouldn't worry about it, I don't think you can frame this as a believer/unbeliever clash.

    To my mind, there are solid nontheist humanist arguments as to why the OP should have the funeral he wants. But when I invite people to explore those, to lay them out, what I get is chip-on-shoulder complaints about arrogance and disrepect. Is there nothigng positive to be said about this?
    IMO everyone should get the type of funeral they want, as far as is practicable. I think that it is the height of disrespect to publically go against someone's living wishes regarding their remains. You are saying to all their family and friends "I know and you know that X was not religious and despised the Catholic church/was very religious and attended mass every day, but f'k 'em. Who cares what they'd think? They're dead".


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,696 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    kylith wrote: »
    Just to be totally certain - you don't think that there's any problem at all with a religious person being given a non-religious funeral, and that anyone who would get annoyed about it should get over it.
    No, no, my position is the complete opposite. As I have said several times, I think the OP should have the secular funeral that he wants. I also think that a person who wants a religious funeral should have one.
    kylith wrote: »
    IMO everyone should get the type of funeral they want, as far as is practicable. I think that it is the height of disrespect to publically go against someone's living wishes regarding their remains. You are saying to all their family and friends "I know and you know that X was not religious and despised the Catholic church/was very religious and attended mass every day, but f'k 'em. Who cares what they'd think? They're dead".
    I’m not saying that at all.

    What I am saying is that, given that the kind of funeral he has can’t actually affect the OP in any way, and given that as an atheist he presumably understands and agrees that it can’t affect him, and given that the denizens on this board presumably also agree with that, it’s worth exploring why it matters that he should have the funeral he wants.

    The reason it matters can’t be anything to do with the “rights” of the deceased person. A dead person doesn’t exist; how can something non-existent have rights? Even if we accept that giving someone the funeral he didn’t want is disrespectful, whose rights are infringed by this disrespect? What harm is done to anyone? The dead are beyond any kind of harm. So, while I completely agree with you that it matters that the OP (and everyone else) should have the funeral they want, we have to find some other account of why it matters.


  • #68
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    No, no, my position is the complete opposite. As I have said several times, I think the OP should have the secular funeral that he wants. I also think that a person who wants a religious funeral should have one.
    As I said, I wanted to make sure of your position. When you said that "If a Christian didn't get his desired form of funeral, I'd say that's every bit as bad as the OP not getting the funeral he wants" I wanted to be sure if you were saying 'why should it matter if a Christian gets the funeral he wants'.
    Peregrinus wrote: »
    I’m not saying that at all.
    I know you're not, I'm saying it. I acknowledge that my use of 'you are saying' could be confusing but I thought it was clear enough from context.
    Peregrinus wrote: »
    What I am saying is that, given that the kind of funeral he has can’t actually affect the OP in any way, and given that as an atheist he presumably understands and agrees that it can’t affect him, and given that the denizens on this board presumably also agree with that, it’s worth exploring why it matters that he should have the funeral he wants.

    The reason it matters can’t be anything to do with the “rights” of the deceased person. A dead person doesn’t exist; how can something non-existent have rights? Even if we accept that giving someone the funeral he didn’t want is disrespectful, whose rights are infringed by this disrespect? What harm is done to anyone? The dead are beyond any kind of harm. So, while I completely agree with you that it matters that the OP (and everyone else) should have the funeral they want, we have to find some other account of why it matters.
    The only why is that it shows a family's regard for their members. I know that I would think less of a family if they gave their atheist member a religious service, or gave a religious member a godless send off. Everyone should get the send-off they want, because to do otherwise is to disrespect them as a person in a very public way and in front of people who know for a fact that the family is disrespecting what that person stood for in life.

    I think that the dead do have rights, but ICBW. If they had no rights then the government could just start taking organs from the deceased without needing an organ donor card, and sex with a corpse or graverobbing wouldn't be crimes. After all, they're dead - what does it matter if you stick your willy in them or take that bracelet? Who does it harm?


  • #69
    Cantremember
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,305 ✭✭✭Cantremember


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    No, no, my position is the complete opposite. As I have said several times, I think the OP should have the secular funeral that he wants. I also think that a person who wants a religious funeral should have one.


    I’m not saying that at all.

    What I am saying is that, given that the kind of funeral he has can’t actually affect the OP in any way, and given that as an atheist he presumably understands and agrees that it can’t affect him, and given that the denizens on this board presumably also agree with that, it’s worth exploring why it matters that he should have the funeral he wants.

    The reason it matters can’t be anything to do with the “rights” of the deceased person. A dead person doesn’t exist; how can something non-existent have rights? Even if we accept that giving someone the funeral he didn’t want is disrespectful, whose rights are infringed by this disrespect? What harm is done to anyone? The dead are beyond any kind of harm. So, while I completely agree with you that it matters that the OP (and everyone else) should have the funeral they want, we have to find some other account of why it matters.

    You were to,d a long time ago in this thread why it matters.


  • #70
    lazygal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    What about the Mormon practice of baptizing the dead? Anyone bothered by that possibility?


  • #71
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,179 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    I'll come back for their brains.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,696 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Cantremember wrote: »
    You were to,d a long time ago in this thread why it matters.
    Was I? Not by you, at any rate. All I got from you on the this subject in your post #46 was that "the point is that the arrogance of the Catholic church is mind-boggling" and that a desire for a secular funeral "simply extends the oppostion to supernaturalists to the disposal of your remains". No account of why any of this should matter to someone who is dead. As an explanation, you'll have to agree that it's lacking something.

    Besides, as I said to Hotblack, is there nothing positive to be said about this? No affirmative claim about the value of funerals for unbelievers? Consider the case of an unbeliever who doesn't have a chip on his shoulder about the "opposition to supernaturalists". Is it your position that it doesn't matter a damn what kind of funeral he gets?


  • #73
    old_aussie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,410 ✭✭✭old_aussie


    Stop family from giving a religious funeral

    After the medical school has finished with your body(that's if they decide they want it), have a non religious funeral.


  • #74
    Cantremember
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,305 ✭✭✭Cantremember


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    Was I? Not by you, at any rate. All I got from you on the this subject in your post #46 was that "the point is that the arrogance of the Catholic church is mind-boggling" and that a desire for a secular funeral "simply extends the oppostion to supernaturalists to the disposal of your remains". No account of why any of this should matter to someone who is dead. As an explanation, you'll have to agree that it's lacking something.

    You have been told by me. Very plainly. Even you can see the answer. What an extraordinary answer "no account of why it should matter to someone who is dead" when you have just read what I wrote. What is lacking here is any grasp on your part is that the thread wasn't written by dead people. Even a supernaturalist should get that. Perhaps you are disappointed because there has been no contribution from beyond the grave.


  • #75
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,696 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    No, I'm disappointed that you don't appear to see any better reason for respecting an unbeliever's funeral wishes than that doing so represents "opposition to supernaturalists". I feel sure that there is more to be said on the subject than that; something less negative; something that might be relevant to an unbeliever who was comfortable about the fact that other people had beliefs which differed from his and did not characterise that as "arrogance". But clearly you, at any rate, are not going to say it.

    I am puzzled at your point that "this thread wasn't written by dead people". What is the relevance of that? I could see an argument that the OP's family owe it to the OP to respect his funeral wishes, even after he is dead, but I can't see any argument that they owe it to Cantremember or Peregrinus or anyone else who has joined the thread to respect the OP's wishes. We might have opinions as to the funeral he should have, but why should those whose business it is to arrange his funeral attach any weight to our opinions?


  • #76
    Absolam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    Cantremember wrote: »
    What is lacking here is any grasp on your part is that the thread wasn't written by dead people.
    All credit to Halloween and all but.... it's unlikely that anyone in the history of Boards has ever failed to grasp that a thread wasn't written by dead people.


  • #77
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    lazygal wrote: »
    What about the Mormon practice of baptizing the dead? Anyone bothered by that possibility?

    The families of the victims of the holocaust, apparently.

    Although this issue is a perfect illustration of why all religions should be seperated from the public sphere.


  • #78
    Cantremember
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,305 ✭✭✭Cantremember


    Absolam wrote: »
    All credit to Halloween and all but.... it's unlikely that anyone in the history of Boards has ever failed to grasp that a thread wasn't written by dead people.

    Subtlety eludes you. To be plain, the dead are dead. Thinking now?


  • #79
    Cantremember
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,305 ✭✭✭Cantremember


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    No, I'm disappointed that you don't appear to see any better reason for respecting an unbeliever's funeral wishes than that doing so represents "opposition to supernaturalists". I feel sure that there is more to be said on the subject than that; something less negative; something that might be relevant to an unbeliever who was comfortable about the fact that other people had beliefs which differed from his and did not characterise that as "arrogance". But clearly you, at any rate, are not going to say it.

    I am puzzled at your point that "this thread wasn't written by dead people". What is the relevance of that? I could see an argument that the OP's family owe it to the OP to respect his funeral wishes, even after he is dead, but I can't see any argument that they owe it to Cantremember or Peregrinus or anyone else who has joined the thread to respect the OP's wishes. We might have opinions as to the funeral he should have, but why should those whose business it is to arrange his funeral attach any weight to our opinions?

    Yes. Typically outrageous condescension. There is no need for "a better reason" than that given. Who are you to demand such? That is a rhetorical question because the answer to any reasonable person is perfectly clear.

    This is typical clerical / theogical writing: nothing of consequence to say but nothingness piled together in a heap of verbiage. What you are angling for Pilgrim and the allusion is very knowing, is some sort of "discussion" about how even after we are dead we aren't. Verbal silliness masquerading as substance. The OP is alive and wants his own funeral his own way: get over it.


  • #80
    swampgas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,579 ✭✭✭swampgas


    I'm with Peregrinus on this one - I do think it is interesting to think about why an atheist might care about their own funeral arrangements.

    Personally, it's up to my wife what happens to my body. She can bury it, cremate it, chop it up for science, whatever. If she gets to do what she wants when I'm dead, that makes me happy now.

    However many people, religious or not, are concerned with their legacy - what mark they have left on the world. For many people their legacy is their children, for others, their life's work. I guess that somebody could be concerned that their funeral (if carried out against their wishes) could mis-represent them, and thus affect their legacy.

    IMO it's an interesting question, and goes deeper than funeral arragements.


  • #81
    Absolam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    Cantremember wrote: »
    Subtlety eludes you. To be plain, the dead are dead. Thinking now?
    I suppose it must. If "What is lacking here is any grasp on your part is that the thread wasn't written by dead people." is intended to convey anything more subtle than what it says, it is truly subtle indeed. But since I'm thinking now, if the dead are dead, as you say, why would you imagine anyone fails to grasp that they're not contributing to internet fora?


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Cantremember
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,305 ✭✭✭Cantremember


    Absolam wrote: »
    I suppose it must. If "What is lacking here is any grasp on your part is that the thread wasn't written by dead people." is intended to convey anything more subtle than what it says, it is truly subtle indeed. But since I'm thinking now, if the dead are dead, as you say, why would you imagine anyone fails to grasp that they're not contributing to internet fora?

    You are, slowly, getting there.


  • #83
    Absolam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    Cantremember wrote: »
    You are, slowly, getting there.
    Well, that's an enormous relief. Sooo.... why would anyone fail to grasp that the thread wasn't written by dead people?


  • #84
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,420 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Cantremember wrote: »
    [...] Pilgrim [...] Verbal silliness masquerading as substance [...]
    Peregrinus's login is spelled "Peregrinus" - P.E.R.E.G.R.I.N.U.S.

    Please use it and avoid the juvenile name-calling.


  • #85
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    Why not just leave them do whatever they want - it's hardly going to inconvenience you now is it?
    Personally speaking - I couldn't give a toss what happens, make burgers out of me and send me to Tesco for all I care!


  • #86
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    swampgas wrote: »
    I'm with Peregrinus on this one - I do think it is interesting to think about why an atheist might care about their own funeral arrangements.
    Because it matters when you're still alive.

    Imagine you're given 6 months to live - that's six months thinking about your own funeral. If you were someone who rejected religion and had a healthy dislike of the catholic church, why should you spend your final months of life counting down the days until some guy in a smock you've never met talks about your life in between spouting untruths and fantasies?

    The older we get, the closer our inevitable end comes, and the more able to deal with it our loved one's will be. In the years (or months) approaching our demise, a non-believer should be allowed the solace of knowing they won't be the centre of a ceremony that goes against everything they believed in. That their beliefs won't be completely disrespected at the very last.

    It's not that hard a concept to grasp.


  • #87
    swampgas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,579 ✭✭✭swampgas


    Dades wrote: »
    Because it matters when you're still alive.

    Imagine you're given 6 months to live - that's six months thinking about your own funeral. If you were someone who rejected religion and had a healthy dislike of the catholic church, why should you spend your final months of life counting down the days until some guy in a smock you've never met talks about your life in between spouting untruths and fantasies?

    The older we get, the closer our inevitable end comes, and the more able to deal with it our loved one's will be. In the years (or months) approaching our demise, a non-believer should be allowed the solace of knowing they won't be the centre of a ceremony that goes against everything they believed in. That their beliefs won't be completely disrespected at the very last.

    It's not that hard a concept to grasp.

    Oh I get the concept, however I think there is a follow on question (obtuse as it might seem) to ask why it matters to me now what happens when I'm dead. I'll be dead, right, so why does it matter? So I think Peregrinus has asked a legitimate question, even if it seems self-evident to many here that such a question is unnecessary.

    It also matters to people that their children will be provided for when they are dead, that's easy enough to explain from an evolutionary standpoint. The religious rites part, not so much.

    Personally, I think this is much more about the relationship of the prospective deceased with his or her family (or whoever gets to decide what funeral rites will be held). Will our next of kin respect our wishes and memory? We can hope so, I'm not sure we have a legal way to force them to do so.

    .


  • #88
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,179 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    swampgas wrote: »
    Oh I get the concept, however I think there is a follow on question (obtuse as it might seem) to ask why it matters to me now what happens when I'm dead. I'll be dead, right, so why does it matter? So I think Peregrinus has asked a legitimate question, even if it seems self-evident to many here that such a question is unnecessary
    For me it would matter as it forms part of the memory of me that will live on in my family and friends minds. While I believe that's the end, I am happier knowing that my childs viewpoint of my beliefs is not skewed by this. I also don't believe that suddenly springing it on my children that I am still around and looking over them is beneficial. If they grow up to believe in such things, then they will understand that if they are right I won't be in a place where looking over them will be possible, and if they follow in my belief system, then they will mourn my passing but move on in a healthy manner, with hopefully positive memories to reflect on, rather than talk to me about when I am not there to listen.
    Personally, I think this is much more about the relationship of the prospective deceased with his or her family (or whoever gets to decide what funeral rites will be held). Will our next of kin to respect our wishes and memory? We can hope so, I'm not sure we have a legal way to force them to do so.
    I wouldn't force them legally, if they are the family i raised and the friends I knew, it won't happen, if they are not the family I raised, or the friends I knew well then, much to my disappointment, there is nothing I can do about it.


  • #89
    Vivisectus
    Registered Users Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Vivisectus


    If atheists cannot care about their funerals, then it must be OK to take the images of a deceased religious person, photo-copy the paraphernalia of some dreadful belief, and publish that far and wide combined with the claim that it represents reality. After all, they are now in whatever afterlife they believe in, and beyond the reach of any character assassination here on earth?

    Or would it be possible for someone now to be upset about the way they will be represented later, even if they do not actually around to experience this happening?


  • #90
    Mr_Red
    Closed Accounts Posts: 483 ✭✭Mr_Red


    Get the instructions tattooed on your body lol


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Vivisectus
    Registered Users Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Vivisectus


    haha "Please dispose of sensibly when used up"

    "Kidneys: widely recycled. Brain: please consult local disposal"


  • #92
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,222 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    swampgas wrote: »
    Oh I get the concept, however I think there is a follow on question (obtuse as it might seem) to ask why it matters to me now what happens when I'm dead. I'll be dead, right, so why does it matter?
    you could also ask whether someone would find it upsetting if they learned, that after their death, there would be unfounded allegations made about them being a paedophile, for example. which would taint peoples' memory of them.

    their concern would not just be in relation to the hurt caused to family members, but to themselves also - even though they would be dead by the time the allegations were made.


  • #93
    Cantremember
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,305 ✭✭✭Cantremember


    Absolam wrote: »
    Well, that's an enormous relief. Sooo.... why would anyone fail to grasp that the thread wasn't written by dead people?

    I'm sure you'll get there.


  • #94
    Cantremember
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,305 ✭✭✭Cantremember


    robindch wrote: »
    Peregrinus's login is spelled "Peregrinus" - P.E.R.E.G.R.I.N.U.S.

    Please use it and avoid the juvenile name-calling.

    Lol. Juvenile name calling? It's a translation from the Latin. Latin is a dead language. People are surely expected to post in English unless there is a foreign language forum. Or a dead language forum. The word may be translated as "the stranger" but it more usually used by the RCC after Vatican 2 which styled itself a "pilgrim church". Why would any believer object to being called pilgrim especially as it is so apposite and is the name he chose himself? Unless of course losing the cachet of the Latin is the problem. I would hope for more informed moderation than that shown here. However, it is what it is and we are where we are. Going forward I will refrain from any use of the name of the said poster, in Latin or English.


  • #95
    Cantremember
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,305 ✭✭✭Cantremember


    swampgas wrote: »
    Oh I get the concept, however I think there is a follow on question (obtuse as it might seem) to ask why it matters to me now what happens when I'm dead. I'll be dead, right, so why does it matter? So I think Peregrinus has asked a legitimate question, even if it seems self-evident to many here that such a question is unnecessary.

    It also matters to people that their children will be provided for when they are dead, that's easy enough to explain from an evolutionary standpoint. The religious rites part, not so much.

    Personally, I think this is much more about the relationship of the prospective deceased with his or her family (or whoever gets to decide what funeral rites will be held). Will our next of kin respect our wishes and memory? We can hope so, I'm not sure we have a legal way to force them to do so.

    .

    The question has been answered so many times that its persistent reposting means only one thing: someone hasn't heard the answer they want to hear. It's time to recognise that they won't.


  • #96
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,179 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Vivisectus wrote: »
    If atheists cannot care about their funerals, then it must be OK to take the images of a deceased religious person, photo-copy the paraphernalia of some dreadful belief, and publish that far and wide combined with the claim that it represents reality. After all, they are now in whatever afterlife they believe in, and beyond the reach of any character assassination here on earth?

    Or would it be possible for someone now to be upset about the way they will be represented later, even if they do not actually around to experience this happening?

    My best example is the death of Kate Fitzgerald, and the subsequent character assassination after her death by a National paper. She was called a liar and was not to be believed, purely on the basis that since she had passed away, she could no longer defend herself, but the words that she instructed painted a poor image of another party (even though she did not name them) who were able to attempt to ruin her reputation etc. in the publics eye. Luckily in the modern age it is far more difficult to do such things but yes, I imagine she would be upset beyond condolence to learn that even in her passing those who helped push her from this world could still bully her without reproach.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,420 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Cantremember wrote: »
    Juvenile name calling?
    Si tacuisses, sapientius meliusque mansisses.


  • #98
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    swampgas wrote: »
    Oh I get the concept, however I think there is a follow on question (obtuse as it might seem) to ask why it matters to me now what happens when I'm dead. I'll be dead, right, so why does it matter? So I think Peregrinus has asked a legitimate question, even if it seems self-evident to many here that such a question is unnecessary.
    I love my wife and children. That won't matter a bit to me when I'm dead. Does that diminish the importance of it in life?

    Everything that matters to us in life will be irrelevant to us in death. Including being comfortable with how your passing will be celebrated.
    swampgas wrote: »
    Personally, I think this is much more about the relationship of the prospective deceased with his or her family (or whoever gets to decide what funeral rites will be held). Will our next of kin respect our wishes and memory? We can hope so, I'm not sure we have a legal way to force them to do so.
    I think family is an important consideration. People say "whatever gives your family comfort" is the best way to go. But is there anything more miserable than a catholic funeral? Some of the secular ceremonies seem to at least grasp the concept of celebrating a life.


  • #99
    swampgas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,579 ✭✭✭swampgas


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    you could also ask whether someone would find it upsetting if they learned, that after their death, there would be unfounded allegations made about them being a paedophile, for example. which would taint peoples' memory of them.

    their concern would not just be in relation to the hurt caused to family members, but to themselves also - even though they would be dead by the time the allegations were made.

    It seems then, that our concern might be those who will survive us rather than for ourselves?

    Let's say a meteor hit Ireland tomorrow and wiped us all out. Would any of us really care about the lack of appropriate funeral arrangements? I doubt it.


  • #100
    swampgas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,579 ✭✭✭swampgas


    Dades wrote: »

    I think family is an important consideration. People say "whatever gives your family comfort" is the best way to go. But is there anything more miserable than a catholic funeral? Some of the secular ceremonies seem to at least grasp the concept of celebrating a life.

    Absolutely - they're grim. However the Irish (to make a huge generalisation) have, IMO a curious attitude to death and misery - we like to wallow in it. I sometimes wonder am I particularly stone-hearted as I tend to see death as a natural and inevitable process rather than anything to get all hysterical about.


  • #101
    swampgas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,579 ✭✭✭swampgas


    Cantremember wrote: »
    The question has been answered so many times that its persistent reposting means only one thing: someone hasn't heard the answer they want to hear. It's time to recognise that they won't.

    Feel free to make a point any time you like.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement