Asked to be a Godparent

bnt

Hippo wrote: »

Agree 100%.

WRT becoming a godparent, I never could as I'm an atheist. Why make all those 'promises' if you don't believe in them, it's complete nonsense.

Well, I'm a "godparent", but I never attended any ceremonies or made any promises to do with religion. My friends are nominally Christian and know I'm an atheist, but probably didn't notice the "god" in "godparent" because they're not going to church much. So it's more like robindch said - more like a "favourite uncle". I've already told my friends (in a nice roundabout way) that if I'm ever asked about religion, by my "goddaughter" or her brothers, I won't lie about my atheism.

Lollymcd

liamw wrote: »

You act as if it's all a 'bother' for everyone involved. I guarantee my mum wouldn't see it as a 'bother' to go to my wedding. In fact I'm sure she would insist on it.

I'm not suggesting that going your wedding would be a bother to anyone, sorry if this is how it came across! I would presume that if someone is an atheist that they would have a civil ceramony, no bother!!! I would be bothered by someone inviting me to their wedding if they were are pronounced atheist and it was in a church, it's just a sham, a lie, the same as standing on an altar and promising to teach a child about religion and you have no intention of doing it. It's lying, plain and simple. I detest the idea of just using the church for christenings, weddings, confirmations etc just to keep parent/neighbours/friends happy. People should have more respect.

If someone is an atheist perhaps it would be more appropriate to ask people to be guardians of their child?

liamw

Lollymcd wrote: »

I'm not suggesting that going your wedding would be a bother to anyone, sorry if this is how it came across! I would presume that if someone is an atheist that they would have a civil ceramony, no bother!!! I would be bothered by someone inviting me to their wedding if they were are pronounced atheist and it was in a church, it's just a sham, a lie, the same as standing on an altar and promising to teach a child about religion and you have no intention of doing it. It's lying, plain and simple. I detest the idea of just using the church for christenings, weddings, confirmations etc just to keep parent/neighbours/friends happy. People should have more respect.

If someone is an atheist perhaps it would be more appropriate to ask people to be guardians of their child?

To an atheist, it's all completely meaningless. Selfish as it may be, I value my partner's happiness over 'lying' in a Church at a wedding. And dude, seriously you say that as if 99% of the populations aren't either atheist or buffet believers that go to Mass once a year to chat to the neighbours. Are these people hypocrites too?

PS. I will avoid a church wedding if I can, and will not christen my child.

Dades

Lollymcd wrote: »

I detest the idea of just using the church for christenings, weddings, confirmations etc just to keep parent/neighbours/friends/wife/husband/partner happy.

I've included the most important people you left out.

Remember, you're not the only person getting married, nor the only parent with a say in the child's upbringing.
People always forget this.

If both partners were non-believers (rare, tbh) - I'm with you all the way.

Lollymcd

liamw wrote: »

To an atheist, it's all completely meaningless. Selfish as it may be, I value my partner's happiness over 'lying' in a Church at a wedding. And dude, seriously you say that as if 99% of the populations aren't either atheist or buffet believers that go to Mass once a year to chat to the neighbours. Are these people hypocrites too?

PS. I will avoid a church wedding if I can, and will not christen my child.

No talking in Mass, one must be silent and solemn and respect the sacrament!!! Just kidding!!!

Fair play for doing that for your partner, it's a big deal to do something that goes against the grain like that. I hope you have a lovely day.

Lollymcd

Dades wrote: »

I've included the most important people you left out.

Remember, you're not the only person getting married, nor the only parent with a say in the child's upbringing.
People always forget this.

If both partners were non-believers (rare, tbh) - I'm with you all the way.

Forgive my ommissions, I agree. I've just come across a lot of mothers and fathers who share the same beliefs/non beliefs. A situation where there are conflicting beliefs has to be in some way difficult for people. I would not wish to be in that situation.

Hippo

liamw wrote: »

Are you really that naive? The reason it's a difficult decision for atheists is often becuase of others in the family who would want the child baptised or the wedding to be in a church.. primarily the parents it seems.

A lot of the time, I've seen atheists go through with it because their partner or relations would be upset if they didn't. You act as if it's all a 'bother' for everyone involved. I guarantee my mum wouldn't see it as a 'bother' to go to my wedding. In fact I'm sure she would insist on it.

Well then atheists should have the courage of their convictions. Does no one ever consider that an atheist might be 'upset' at having to go through the motions?

liamw

Hippo wrote: »

Well then atheists should have the courage of their convictions. Does no one ever consider that an atheist might be 'upset' at having to go through the motions?

Indeed they should! You're absolutely right. But there's a distinct difference: For the Christian it's part of their religious ritual, for an atheist it's meaningless. If you don't believe, then technically it's just words and that's why people aren't empathetic towards atheists. Can't blame them really when we go around eating babies

Hippo

I don't agree at all; while I take your point that it's 'meaningless', to me, standing up in public and spouting a load of stuff I don't believe in is completely contrary to my convictions. And what are other people supposed to make of what I've just said, are they supposed to be in on the secret? Nothing 'meaningless' about all that. In fact, I'll go further and say that what you're suggesting is a kind of 'a la carte' atheism.

PDN

Hippo wrote: »

In fact, I'll go further and say that what you're suggesting is a kind of 'a la carte' atheism.

As opposed to a dogmatic 'toe-the-line' atheism?

What next, 'a la carte' non-stamp-collecting? Heaven help us!

liamw

Well, if you knew me you would probably say that I'm quite a strong atheist. I hate religious nonsense interfering with my life at all, and hate the fact that we live in 2010 with such amazing feats of scientific endeavour and yet betray all that with this mindless bronze age crap.

However, this is one subject that really tears me. Who do I care about more, myself or my partner and parents or children? You could almost argue that it's selfish for me to deny my partner her wedding day which she's looked forward to for years. You could also argue it's selfish to not baptise my kid becuase it could restrict him/her from certain schools and set him/her as an outsider for other occasions.

At the end of the day, it's just tradition. Weddings are f**k all to do with religion. So you could say buffet believers are just as bad as saying all those words, becuase they don't even think about the words either... the words have already faded by the time the groom kisses the bride.

Hippo

PDN wrote: »

As opposed to a dogmatic 'toe-the-line' atheism?

What next, 'a la carte' non-stamp-collecting? Heaven help us!

I say that purely because so many atheists would be quick to accuse, for instance, catholics of the very same thing. I'm not suggesting dogmatic, toe- the- line- anything, just that going through the motions of this kind of ceremony wouldn't sit well with me. And while I'm sure you're trying to be funny with the 'non-stamp collecting' comparison it doesn't really make any sense, sorry.

Sid_Justice

My friend was asked by his sister to be godchild to her son on the condition that be believed in God. After some personal reflection, he concluded he did not, so she asked the other brother to do it. I think he regrets missing out on the experience, and probably, wouldn't have had a problem going through the Christian motions.

I come from a very culturally Christian household. My grandparents would have been quite religious and avid mass goers throughout their life. My parents, however, in the last 20 years or so, only attend mass at ceremonies like baptisms/weddings/funerals, and occasionally Christmas.

Despite this, to the best of my knowledge, my parents still subscribe in general to the concept of Christianity and don't spend much time in theological thought about the exact nature of God, should one exist.

Furthermore, as far as I know, my brothers have a similar belief system to my parents, as did I until about a few months ago. As I've lost faith in the Catholic Church in Ireland as a organisation, I challenged my own spirtual beliefs as a whole and have decided to follow the scientific route, and as such, 'don't believe'.

To bring this back on topic, I expect to find myself in the same position as the original poster in a few years. While this time last year it would be a trivial thing for me to do to acquiesce to Christian traditions, i think it would be more difficult now. But at the same time, I would consider myself (perhaps slightly arrogantly) to be more knowledgeable and informed about the Christian faith(s) and perhaps just as good as candidate. sorry this post has got out of hand i'll stop now.

Ickle Magoo

Hippo wrote: »

I don't agree at all; while I take your point that it's 'meaningless', to me, standing up in public and spouting a load of stuff I don't believe in is completely contrary to my convictions. And what are other people supposed to make of what I've just said, are they supposed to be in on the secret? Nothing 'meaningless' about all that. In fact, I'll go further and say that what you're suggesting is a kind of 'a la carte' atheism.

I disagree, I'd call it compromising for the sake of people you love and their beliefs. I'm lucky, I happened to fall in love in love with another atheist - if I hadn't then our wedding day would have to be a compromise of both our beliefs, since they would both have equal status. I view it as much the same as life with an Irish husband, there are a few things we have to juggle around that people that come from the same country don't but that's the price we're willing to pay to have each other.

You can't help who you fall in love with for the most part and you can't demand they be the ones to make all the concessions or that their beliefs and wishes come second to your own - well, I guess you could but I suspect that's not the kind of relationship to which most people aspire.

Dades

Hippo wrote: »

I say that purely because so many atheists would be quick to accuse, for instance, catholics of the very same thing.

It couldn't ever be the same thing given there are no rules relating to not believing in deities. So what doesn't sit with you, might sit fine with another atheist.

PDN

Hippo wrote: »

I say that purely because so many atheists would be quick to accuse, for instance, catholics of the very same thing.

Indeed, because Catholicism is a religion, with dogma.

I'm not suggesting dogmatic, toe- the- line- anything, just that going through the motions of this kind of ceremony wouldn't sit well with me.

And isn't choosing to do that which does "sit well with you" the very essence of 'a la carte'?

And while I'm sure you're trying to be funny with the 'non-stamp collecting' comparison it doesn't really make any sense, sorry.

It's a common response round these parts if anyone attempts to portray atheism as a faith or a religion.

dvpower

Hippo wrote: »

I say that purely because so many atheists would be quick to accuse, for instance, catholics of the very same thing. I'm not suggesting dogmatic, toe- the- line- anything, just that going through the motions of this kind of ceremony wouldn't sit well with me. And while I'm sure you're trying to be funny with the 'non-stamp collecting' comparison it doesn't really make any sense, sorry.

One can be an atheist without being an anti theist.

Lets face it, even for most common or garden catholics these days the role of a godparent isn't a spiritual one; it is to have a special relationship with the child. Its a privilage to be asked so I wouldn't turn down an offer for anti religious reasons (and thb, I wouldn't have enough respect for the rc church to turn it down on grounds of respect for them).

So, as long as the childs parents are happy to have an atheist as a godparent, I'd be OK with it too.

robindch

Hippo wrote: »

Does no one ever consider that an atheist might be 'upset' at having to go through the motions?

I'm sure people do from time to time, but I don't ever recall it happening within my earshot.