Waters, Waters everywhere ...

Myksyk

Just wondering what people thought of John Waters' homily, I mean column, in Monday's Irish Times which makes the argument that life without religion is devoid of meaning, freedom and hope? In it he praises Bertie for his recent questioning of "aggressive secularism" and makes the argument that people have an intrinsic need for what religion has to offer.

Dades

Bascially...

[John Waters'] life without religion is devoid of meaning, freedom and hope ... [John Waters] ha an intrinsic need for what religion has to offer.

It does anger me that he gets a pulpit to peddle his crazy from.

monkeyfudge

Yeah... John.. and you've given us lots of hope with that crappy Eurovision entry haven't you?

If that sh*te manages to win then there probably is a god.

5uspect

Yes, the suicide rate amongst atheists is shocking, not to mention the gangs of roaming atheists going around warning "The End in Nigh!".

Zombrex

Myksyk wrote:

Just wondering what people thought of John Waters' homily, I mean column, in Monday's Irish Times which makes the argument that life without religion is devoid of meaning, freedom and hope?

Well his life might be devoid of meaning and hope without religion ... but sure it is devoid of meaning and hope with religion too, so that is that

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
who is John Waters btw?

monkeyfudge

Wicknight wrote:

who is John Waters btw?

He's a columnist in the Irish Times. I'm amazed he took time out from winging about fathers rights to write this, because that's pretty much all he does with the column any time I've tried reading it.

He also wrote Ireland's entry for the eurovision this year. It's rubbish.

Nature Boy

I actually feel embarased for the guy who wrote that. Especially when he implied that all atheists take drugs, commit sex crimes, etc.

Stupid article

Schuhart

The Atheist wrote:

It does anger me that he gets a pulpit to peddle his crazy from.

I don't mind giving these folk pulpits. The sheer nuttiness probably does more for secularism than any amount of careful argument.

There's really only one question that I'd like to ask him. Having a child with Sinead O'Connor; what was that all about, John?

Dave!

If that's the case, then John Waters' life is pretty pathetic.

Myksyk

The basic error of the argument is the demonstrable fact that atheists do not, regardless of what Mr. Waters may argue, experience lives devoid of meaning, hope or freedom. In addition, the fact that people may want what religion has to offer is not a comment on the truth of the ideas of religion but an acknowledgement of the undeniable emotional/psychological/social impact of the claims made on its behalf ... everlasting happiness, forgiveness, immortality, unconditional love etc etc.

Zillah

Wicknight wrote:

Well his life might be devoid of meaning and hope without religion ...

Thats why I always say we should go for their children. The average adult believer is so dependent upon their religious easy answers that they don't have the emotional strength to function without them.

So we get their children. This generation can't be saved, but the next one might

Feel free to quote me out of context on "Get their children"...

Beruthiel

My life is devoid of meaning and hope?
I did not know this and all the time me having a great time

Back to the bog with ya John, I blame the Brothers School.
See Mr. John Waters comes from the same town as my good self and would have gone to the Brothers school as a boy, that school was a scary place by all accounts and I'm not surprised he's a tad crazy as a result.

Zombrex

Schuhart wrote:

Having a child with Sinead O'Connor; what was that all about, John?

Isn't there a law against that .... ?

Dave!

There f*cking better be.

Mr McDowell, I need to talk to you....!!!

MoominPapa

Anyone catch waters covering for karen coleman on newstalk at the w/e? It was really painfull, he's very limited and newstalk give him far too much airtime as a rent a gob on the morning paper reviews. He sees himself as a towering intellectual whereas he is about as mediocre as Kevin Myers, just slightly less pompous. anyway anytime I hear someone say that life without religion is meaningless I think of Nietzsches comment:"Life without music would be a mistake", going on waters eurovision entry I would say that his life is without music therefore to correct the mistake of his existance he seeks meaning in "belief" and because his sad existance requires it he assumes everyone else does as well

coffee_cake

How amusing.
Christians seem to spend their entire lives waiting for what happens after death, atheists appreciate this life as the one and only and presumably try to make the most of it. Yet it's an atheist's life which is meaningless? Hm...

Dave!

Anybody able to post the article for us? The Times' website want money

Sangre

Myksyk wrote:

Just wondering what people thought of John Waters' homily, I mean column, in Monday's Irish Times which makes the argument that life without religion is devoid of meaning, freedom and hope? In it he praises Bertie for his recent questioning of "aggressive secularism" and makes the argument that people have an intrinsic need for what religion has to offer.

How is it possible to aggressively promote secularism yet at the same time have a life devoid of meaning?

Zombrex

Sangre wrote:

How is it possible to aggressively promote secularism yet at the same time have a life devoid of meaning?

LOL .. yeah I was wondering that too. Surely aggressively promoting secularism would give your life a meaning and a purpose ...

Scofflaw

Sangre wrote:

How is it possible to aggressively promote secularism yet at the same time have a life devoid of meaning?

It's because we're tools of Satan.

Wicknight wrote:

LOL .. yeah I was wondering that too. Surely aggressively promoting secularism would give your life a meaning and a purpose ...

Mindless tools of Satan, meaninglessly obeying our dark master. Come on, Wicknight, you know this stuff...

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sangre

Is our meaning then not to be tools of satan?

Scofflaw

Sangre wrote:

Is our meaning then not to be tools of satan?

Nah - I think that's intrinsically meaningless. Being a tool of God is meaningful, so being a tool of Satan would obviously be the reverse...besides, mindlessness = meaninglessness. You only think you're not mindlessly obeying Satan, because you're being deluded by Satan - or whatever, you know? It's all good. Or bad.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Stephen

Has this guy ever talked to an atheist or does he just pull this bull5hit out of his arse?

Myksyk

Said Article:


Probably the most interesting speech by a politician for years was delivered last week by the Taoiseach when he warned of the dangers of "aggressive secularism", writes John Waters
Speaking in Dublin Castle at the opening of a "structured dialogue with churches, faith communities and non-confessional bodies", Mr Ahern touched on the most dangerous trend in modern societies: the tendency of public discourse to sideline or disparage religion as something outmoded or dangerous. "So much of what is happening within our society and in the wider world is bound up with questions of religion, religious identity and religious belief," he said, "that governments which refuse or fail to engage with religious communities and religious identities risk failing in their fundamental duties to their citizens." This, considering the secularised nature of the discourse into which the Taoiseach was seeking to advance his analysis, was radical stuff. Usually when we hear talk in the public square about a "right" to religious belief, it is in the context of the need for public "tolerance" of faith and religious practice.
The implication is seldom far from the surface of such platitudes that, of course, whereas those who engage in such superstitions are to be "tolerated", they are also to be regarded as engaging in a near-obsolescent and unmodern activity. Our society seems merely to put up with people who believe in God because such "tolerance" is part of our liberal ideology
It is some time since I heard a public figure identify precisely why this is such a dangerous trend. We are suffering at present, the Taoiseach said, from "a form of aggressive secularism which would have the State and State institutions ignore the importance of the religious dimension. They argue that the State and public policy should become intolerant of religious belief and preference, and confine it, at best, to the purely private and personal, without rights or a role within the pubic domain. Such illiberal voices would diminish our democracy. They would deny a crucial dimension of the dignity of every person and their rights to live out their spiritual code within a framework of lawful practice which is respectful of the dignity and rights of all citizens. It would be a betrayal of the best traditions of Irish republicanism to create such an environment."
Mr Ahern here expressed something that no politician or public figure has articulated for a generation, and few clergymen have managed to say so well. Usually when the subject of religion is broached in public it is either by way of pious invocation or derisory dismissal.
Catholic bishops, for example, frequently speak about the importance of religious faith, but they tend, in doing so, to suggest that faith and religion should be embraced as a kind of duty, perhaps even a duty to them and their church, or, in the personal context, a guarantor of goodness. The Taoiseach was saying something altogether more interesting and profound: that human beings have a deep need for what religion offers, and that the right to practice is therefore a fundamental human entitlement. Although the current fashionability of atheism, agnosticism and secularism tends to convey that religion is merely a hangover from outmoded tradition, there is considerable evidence that it is, in fact, a natural and essential element of the human psyche.
The mood of the present tends to dismiss what our forebears took for granted: that we are born with a longing for what is "beyond", and that this longing is as real in us as the sexual instinct or the sense of smell.
Disparaged it may be, but tradition knew something about us that we seek to deny: there is a religious dimension inherent in the human being, faith comes from within, and without these we are less than human. This surely tells us that the importance of religion goes far beyond issues of morality and identity, extending also to hope, meaning and freedom.
The world on its own does not offer sufficient hope to carry the average human being through an average life. The baubles of the marketplace do not for long serve to quiet the longing in the human heart. And the promise of earthly freedom fails to address the issue of how we are to free ourselves from our instincts, our weaknesses, our egos and our selfishness.
As we observe our society plunging into the secular paradise promised by the liberal ideologues who triumphed over the custodians of tradition, we observe also the manifestation of the many baneful symptoms of this shift. Alcohol, drugs, rampant consumerism, sex crimes and countless related phenomena tell us that there is something in the human being that is voided by secular, material society.
Increasingly, our society manifests an erosion of hope, a misdefinition of freedom and a collapse of meaning, and all of these phenomena are directly related to the disappearance from our culture of what we know of as religion.
This is not simply because the Catholic Church has lost the authority to tell us what to do, but because, in the absence of a religious consciousness, there is, ultimately, no hope, no meaning and no freedom.

5uspect

Of course back in the glory days of the RCC in Ireland, "Alcohol, drugs, rampant consumerism, sex crimes and countless related phenomena" were non existent. I mean they couldn't possibly cover up such things like that could they?

I'd imagine that rampant consumerism would be difficult back then considering we didn't really have any jobs, or shops, or anything really. So why is economic success such a bad thing? Why is choice wrong?

This guy is living in la la land.

robindch

hmmm... I see a local contributor <ahem> got a note into today's Irish Times:

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/letters/2007/0308/index.html

coffee_cake

robindch wrote:

hmmm... I see a local contributor <ahem> got a note into today's Irish Times:

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/letters/2007/0308/index.html

Who and which note...?
/is reading them

robindch

> Who and which note...?

Well, look at my login and look at the list of letter-writers

(BTW, that letter was incomplete. I pressed ctrl-enter by mistook in outlook. Thought that I popped the network socket quickly enough to stop the email, but it looks like I didn't. Oh, well. So much for "we'll contact you to verify your credentials!")

Zillah

Scofflaw wrote:

It's because we're tools of Satan.

I for one welcome our new malicious master.

Myksyk

Saw that ... Nice one Robin!

Myksyk

we are born with a longing for what is "beyond", and that this longing is as real in us as the sexual instinct or the sense of smell.

This is nonsense. We are born with nothing of the kind. We are schooled and fed over our early years with all manner of ideas about mythical beings in the sky and then long for what we're told they offer ... immortality, everlasting love and whatever you're having yourself. Waters' level of honest analysis here is paper thin.