Atheist Ireland membership now open

adamd164

I'm in no way affiliated with AI, I am posting this because I genuinely feel it should be of interest to at least a few on here.

Atheist Ireland, the only national representative body for nonreligious persons, are now accepting formal memberships at http://www.atheist.ie/cgi-bin/atheistireland/pm.cgi

Waged €25 p.a.
Unwaged €10 p.a.

Their constitution and aims are at http://www.secularireland.org

And here is the chairperson Michael Nugent discussing their formation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYk1N-pbTtY

AGM is to be held in March sometime, I believe.

ChocolateSauce

Every random article in secularireland wiki is in Chinese...

AtomicHorror

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

Every random article in secularireland wiki is in Chinese...

Not seeing it...

adamd164

That's spam, they're trying to implement a blocking add-on to get rid of it.


You can only see it if you click View all Articles. Just use the links on the main page.

Húrin

Nugent thinks that atheism makes equality and empathy more likely. This does not follow, as atheism would have to prescribe a moral code. It is not capable of this.

He's preaching the kind of exclusive rationalism that has been thoroughly shot down over the past eighty years in both psychoanalysis and philosophy. Ridiculous.

Dades

I think their aim of removing the constitutional mention of God is somewhat ambitious. The world will be a lot warmer place by the time you could get the Irish people to vote God out in a referendum. :pac:

Regarding the website, I also think publishing peoples' usernames rather than real names opposite the stated goals/aims etc of the group is a mistake.

I mean who is going to respect an organisation helmed by people like RavingGob****e and freakysnatch?

Meh!
Best of luck anyway!

ChocolateSauce

Dades wrote: »

I think their aim of removing the constitutional mention of God is somewhat ambitious. The world will be a lot warmer place by the time you could get the Irish people to vote God out in a referendum. :pac:

Regarding the website, I also think publishing peoples' usernames rather than real names opposite the stated goals/aims etc of the group is a mistake.

I mean who is going to respect an organisation helmed by people like RavingGob****e and freakysnatch?

Meh!
Best of luck anyway!

Freakysnatch :eek:

adamd164

Dades wrote: »

I think their aim of removing the constitutional mention of God is somewhat ambitious. The world will be a lot warmer place by the time you could get the Irish people to vote God out in a referendum. :pac:

Regarding the website, I also think publishing peoples' usernames rather than real names opposite the stated goals/aims etc of the group is a mistake.

I mean who is going to respect an organisation helmed by people like RavingGob****e and freakysnatch?

Meh!
Best of luck anyway!

That wiki is edited by volunteers, I'll remove the username lark.

Anyway, good to see people here rowing in behind the organisation.:rolleyes:

Are there any aims which - ambitious or not - nonreligious people here would disagree with?

Do non-religious people here not feel that a national representative body would better serve their interests in striving for a secular nation? If not, why not?

adamd164

Húrin wrote: »

Nugent thinks that atheism makes equality and empathy more likely. This does not follow, as atheism would have to prescribe a moral code.

No it would not have to. Nugent's point is that religion is divisive; ergo, while there are different religious factions preaching their own messages (many of which specifically involve scorning outsiders), such a state cannot be reached. He is saying that atheism is a necesary precondition for such a state, but not in itself a sufficient one.

Dades

adamd164 wrote: »

Anyway, good to see atheists rowing in behind the organisation.:rolleyes:

I don't get the rolleyes... is the organisation not open to constructive criticism? I made a suggestion regarding the website to avoid it looking embarrassingly amateur.

adamd164 wrote: »

Do non-religious people here not feel that a national representative body would better serve their interests in striving for a secular nation?

I guess that would depend on the approach, and only time will tell how that works out. TBH I think a lot of people here were content to have the HAI represent their interests.

Don't mistake a reservation of judgment for non-support. I don't doubt we'll all be watching this space with interest.

Nodin

Dades wrote: »

I mean who is going to respect an organisation helmed by people like RavingGob****e and freakysnatch?

Well, they voted in the Bertie & Harney show.....

Rev Hellfire

http://www.atheist.ie/cgi-bin/atheistireland/pm.cgi

Call me fussy but if you're going to show a big old picture of the earth, perhaps actually having Ireland visible would be a start

Tim_Murphy

Do non-religious people here not feel that a national representative body would better serve their interests in striving for a secular nation?

Not really no. Not when the HAI has been up and running for quite a while.

Nodin

I read the summary of aims bit. Promoting Atheism and Reason over Supernaturalism and Superstition - no problems with whats listed there. Promoting a secular, ethical Ireland....no real problems there either. However - when we get to "Challening the harm religon can cause"

Challenge harm caused by organised religion - A can of worms if ever there was one.
Challenge RC Church role in cancelling cervical cancer vaccine - What role? Its news to me.
Prevent the introduction of Islamic Sharia Law - Only the other day I stood aghast as bearded members of a local Fianna Fail cumanna poured my pint of stout down the drain.....Or maybe not.

http://www.secularireland.org/wiki/index.php?title=Summary_of_Aims

Dragan

adamd164 wrote: »

Anyway, good to see people here rowing in behind the organisation.:rolleyes:

Out of interest, why should we? Someone having, very roughly, a similar belief to me, does not imply that i should stand beside them and wave their flag.

Rev Hellfire

Dragan wrote: »

Out of interest, why should we? Someone having, very roughly, a similar belief to me, does not imply that i should stand beside them and wave their flag.

Added to which there is already a well established organisation in the HAI which seeks to do the very same thing.

adamd164

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Added to which there is already a well established organisation in the HAI which seeks to do the very same thing.

Have you actually read the aims list?!

Have a read through it there.

The HAI represents Humanists, not nonreligious interests. They spend most of their time tiptoeing around conflict and attempting to appease religious interests.

(btw, if you're a religious wum please give up the goat and don't bother answering)

Dragan

adamd164 wrote: »

(btw, if you're a religious wum please give up the goat and don't bother answering)

You see, this is one of the main issues i have with the modern day atheists, the religion bashing. With all due respect, i have been fighting my own individual fight to just be left alone to not believe in peace since i first refused to serve in Mass at the age of 10. I didn't feel the need to bash other people's beliefs then and i don't feel the need to do it now. Sure, i will question their beliefs and i will do so with logic and common sense on my side...but i feel the pointless agression brought on by a lot of people is right up there with the intolerance you so claim to fight.

I would simply put it that if you are going to post on a public forum, people can reply from whatever viewpoint they wish. If you find that so offencesive then i am sure there are plenty of websites out there where happy little groups on non believers can all back slap each other and feel great about being "enlightened".

Dawkinism for the win, eh?

Nodin

Dragan wrote: »

You see, this is one of the main issues i have with the modern day atheists,

'with some of the' might be more accurate.

Dragan

Nodin wrote: »

'with some of the' might be more accurate.

Absolutely, didn't mean to be tarring everyone with the same brush. Apologies.

Rev Hellfire

adamd164 wrote: »

Have you actually read the aims list?!

I did indeed.

I'm assuming that by non-religionist you mean secular, a goal which is fundamental to the aims of the HAI.

http://www.humanism.ie/aboutus.html

The HAI represents Humanists, not nonreligious interests.

Perhaps you'll explain how secularism differs from non-religious interests.
Or perhaps by non-religious you mean anti-religious ?

They spend most of their time tiptoeing around conflict and attempting to appease religious interests.

Such as ?

(btw, if you're a religious wum please give up the goat and don't bother answering)

Its a public forum, if I was so inclined why should I not be allowed voice my opinion.

Nodin

Dragan wrote: »

Absolutely, didn't mean to be tarring everyone with the same brush. Apologies.

No Problemo:)

adamd164

FAO Dagan

You see, possibly even moreso than the faith-heads, the issue I have with "I'm an atheist butt"-heads like yourself is their willingness to buy into the fallacy perpetuated by religious charlatans (safe in the knowledge that the ignoramous on the street will swallow it whole) that we all worship the divine and infallible being that is Dawkins.

Do you mean to say, sir/madam, that I can't think for myself merely because, like Dawkins, religious windup merchants irritate me? Simplistic conclusion to arrive at, if nothing else.

Either way, I don't represent AI, I don't speak on their behalf. Casting aspersions based on the views of an inidividual throws some doubt on your claim to open minded rationality.

Nodin

adamd164 wrote:

They spend most of their time tiptoeing around conflict and attempting to appease religious interests.

What, like failing to take a tilt at the dire threat of Sharia law in Ireland?

Nodin

adamd164 wrote: »

You see, possibly even moreso than the faith-heads, the issue I have with "I'm an atheist butt"-heads like yourself is their willingness to buy into the fallacy perpetuated by religious charlatans that we all worship the divine and infallible being that is Dawkins.

Do you mean to say, sir/madam, that I can't think for myself merely because, like Dawkins, religious windup merchants irritate me? Simplistic conclusion to arrive at, if nothing else.

Either way, I don't represent AI, I don't speak on their behalf. Casting aspersions based on the views of an inidividual throws some doubt on your claim to open minded rationality.

Ye see, the thing is, I never mentioned Dawkins....

adamd164

Nodin wrote: »

Ye see, the thing is, I never mentioned Dawkins....

Apologies for the ambiguity - my comments were aimed as user "Dragan". Please accept my sincerest, etc.

adamd164

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Perhaps you'll explain how secularism differs from non-religious interests.

Here's a list AI's aims that would not, and could not, be found on those of the HAI, whose membership is not - by definition - limited to atheists.

Put across atheist point of view in the media
How to live as an atheist, atheist community, rearing children
Provide a focal point for fellowship of non-religious people
Challenge harm caused by organised religion
Prevent the introduction of Islamic Sharia Law
Support atheist bus advert
Combat support for religious mindset in the media
Get public figures to declare their non-belief
Network with relevant groups in ireland and beyond
Counter religious evangelists

Nodin

adamd164 wrote: »

Apologies for the ambiguity - my comments were aimed as user "Dragan". Please accept my sincerest, etc.

Indeedy.

Rev Hellfire

adamd164 wrote: »

Put across atheist point of view in the media

And what is the athiest view point beyond the disbelief in deities.

adamd164 wrote: »

How to live atheist, atheist community, rearing children

The HAI has and continues to provide alternatives to the religious elements in Irish life, such as secular wedding ceremonies, 'christenings', burials etc.
It has also encouraged the separation of state and church. Again nothing new or beneficial been proposed here.

adamd164 wrote:

Provide a focal point for fellowship of non-religious people

That's nice. Its good to talk.

adamd164 wrote:

Prevent the introduction of Islamic Sharia Law

Yes, because its such a danger in a country where we all complain is to much under the influence of catholic church.
Perhaps the Iranian Atheist Party should campaign against the Catholic church there and the possible danger is represents in Iran.

Get public figures to declare their non-belief

What business is it of anyone's what someone else believes ?

Support atheist bus advert

We all liked the bus here, its hardly an idea unique to yourselves, its been mentioned numerous times here.

Dades

adamd164 wrote: »

Here's a list AI's aims that would not, and could not, be found on those of the HAI, whose membership is not - by definition - limited to atheists.

Several of those are clearly endorsed by the HAI - just because they haven't typed them out on their site doesn't mean otherwise.

Dragan

adamd164 wrote: »

FAO Dagan

You see, possibly even moreso than the faith-heads, the issue I have with "I'm an atheist butt"-heads like yourself is their willingness to buy into the fallacy perpetuated by religious charlatans (safe in the knowledge that the ignoramous on the street will swallow it whole) that we all worship the divine and infallible being that is Dawkins.

Do you mean to say, sir/madam, that I can't think for myself merely because, like Dawkins, religious windup merchants irritate me? Simplistic conclusion to arrive at, if nothing else.

Either way, I don't represent AI, I don't speak on their behalf. Casting aspersions based on the views of an inidividual throws some doubt on your claim to open minded rationality.

*grins* In all fairness, you were the one in this thread implying we should throw our weight in behind said organisation, merely because we are all atheists. To me that is a bit like a Priest turning to a Rabbi and saying "lets hold hands as we are both religious". My point was merely with YOU implying that we should all be on the same boat...I don't think i said anything at all about the organisation itself.

I don't think i said you were not able to think for yourself, merely that i have issues with how happy you seem to be to pigeon hole the religious, and pointed out that as far as i am concerned this has only really become rife since the rise of Dawkins.

So, i guess my effort in this post is simply to say i was not casting aspersions on any organisation, merely pointing out my issues with the way you are putting yourself across. If you wish to read more into it than that, then knock yourself out.

gramlab

adamd164 wrote: »

I'm in no way affiliated with AI,

Dades wrote: »

Regarding the website, I also think publishing peoples' usernames rather than real names opposite the stated goals/aims etc of the group is a mistake.

adamd164 wrote: »

That wiki is edited by volunteers, I'll remove the username lark.

I'm confused. How can you correct the user name thing if you are not affiliated with the site?

Tim_Murphy

I'd have zero interest in getting involved in any kind of atheist club but even if I did the 'angry at the religous world I find myself in' vibe I got any time I had a look on atheist.ie or read posts on here from guys who are members of that site would put me off this group.

adamd164

gramlab wrote: »

I'm confused. How can you correct the user name thing if you are not affiliated with the site?

Anyone can register and voluntarily edit the Wiki. I chose to do so. How does that make me an affiliate? You can register right now, go ahead, please!

adamd164

Tim_Murphy wrote: »

I'd have zero interest in getting involved in any kind of atheist club

Atheist "club"? That seems to imply that the group has no real political aims or objectives.

Or was it just a throwaway remark intended to patronise and condescend as much as possible?

It may interest some of you to know that Dick Spicer, vice president of the HAI, has endorsed Atheist Ireland 100%, because he feels it can tackle issues that the HAI daren't touch for fear of breaching their ethos.

Húrin

adamd164 wrote: »

Here's a list AI's aims that would not, and could not, be found on those of the HAI, whose membership is not - by definition - limited to atheists.

How to live as an atheist, atheist community, rearing children
Provide a focal point for fellowship of non-religious people

These are interesting variations on the book of Acts. What positive values would unite atheists together, and provide a common ground? Or at least provide a topic of conversation?

Put across atheist point of view in the media
Challenge harm caused by organised religion
Combat support for religious mindset in the media
Get public figures to declare their non-belief
Counter religious evangelists

So, a 'non-religious' agenda actually means an anti-religious agenda.

Dades

adamd164 wrote: »

It may interest some of you to know that Dick Spicer, vice president of the HAI, has endorsed Atheist Ireland 100%, because he feels it can tackle issues that the HAI daren't touch for fear of breaching their ethos.

That indeed is interesting...

In fact that's the most relevant piece of info I've read on the topic of AI - perhaps you should have mentioned it earlier!

adamd164

Dades wrote: »

That indeed is interesting...

In fact that's the most relevant piece of info I've read on the topic of AI - perhaps you should have mentioned it earlier!

We all know that the HAI unofficially endorse those aims I listed (as you said), but the fact is they actually CAN'T tackling them politically or take an official stance. And therefore it's useless as a political entity when it comes to them.

Dades

adamd164 wrote: »

We all know that the HAI unofficially endorse those aims I listed (as you said), but the fact is they actually CAN'T tackling them politically or take an official stance. And therefore it's useless as a political entity when it comes to them.

That's all well and good, but I think some people here will remember it being said by one of the members on the last Atheist Ireland thread that there was no intention to interact with the government on issues. I take it that policy has changed? A political stance isn't much use without interaction!

lostexpectation

Dades wrote: »

That's all well and good, but I think some people here will remember it being said by one of the members on the last Atheist Ireland thread that there was no intention to interact with the government on issues. I take it that policy has changed? A political stance isn't much use without interaction!

I repeatedly said that was only my personal opinion, i think it reflected some thoughts of the group, but was not policy,or ruling anything in or out, you repeatedly read that but chose to ignore it, your hostility is unbelievable.

the summary of aims was just summary of proposed aims made before the constitution, which reduces the importance of tacking the church itself and put the focus on the state.

Rev Hellfire

lostexpectation wrote: »

I repeatedly said that was only my personal opinion, i think it reflected some thoughts of the group, but was not policy,or ruling anything in or out, you repeatedly read that but chose to ignore it, your hostility is unbelievable.

the summary of aims was just summary of proposed aims made before the constitution, which reduces the importance of tacking the church itself and put the focus on the state.

A case of split personalities :eek:

adamd164

Political interaction IS a goal of Atheist Ireland. Just to clear that up.

Dades

lostexpectation wrote: »

your hostility is unbelievable

Hostile to who or what, exactly? If you guys can't take a few pertinent questions from other non-believers what's a real grilling going to be like?

ChocolateSauce

Dades wrote: »

That indeed is interesting...

In fact that's the most relevant piece of info I've read on the topic of AI - perhaps you should have mentioned it earlier!

Defo....very very interesting. Almost like good cop bad cop!

Can someone please post a link to where exactly this endorsement was posted on-line (I'm assuming it was) so that I can reference it if need be?

Tim_Murphy

adamd164 wrote: »

Atheist "club"? That seems to imply that the group has no real political aims or objectives.

Or was it just a throwaway remark intended to patronise and condescend as much as possible?

It may interest some of you to know that Dick Spicer, vice president of the HAI, has endorsed Atheist Ireland 100%, because he feels it can tackle issues that the HAI daren't touch for fear of breaching their ethos.

It was a throwaway remark but I didn't to be patronising or condescending. But to be honest a lot of the aims seem to be fairly wishy-washy or simply irrelevant, i.e. "Prevent the introduction of Islamic Sharia Law" ??? Its almost as if they were things that people came up with to put on a list after they decided they wanted to create this group in the first place. I read some of the discussions about the formation of AI before it happened and it definitely seemed to be the case that people decided they wanted to have the group first, then afterwards they decided what the aims and objectives should be, which says a lot really.

lostexpectation

Dades wrote: »

Hostile to who or what, exactly? If you guys can't take a few pertinent questions from other non-believers what's a real grilling going to be like?

purposefully misquoting me is the problem

you guys think your first people to think of the problems with organising, your not btw.

Scofflaw

I see the cat-herding is going as well as can be expected!

cordially,
Scofflaw