All the atheists in the Dail

Tim Robbins

Well massive changes in the Irish political landscape. A whole pile of lefties who I suspect are atheist / agnostic.

I wonder will we see any changes regarding secularism and separation of church and state.

Dave!

Let's name them!

Off the top of my head...

Joe Higgins SP
Ming Flanagan Ind
Eamon Gilmore Lab
Clare Daly SP
Ruairi Quinn Lab

I suspect...

Pat Rabbitte Lab
Richard Boyd-Barrett PBP

magicbastarder

michael martin.
well, he probably is now, he'll be wondering why god has deserted him.

bnt

Ivana Bacik didn't make it in, though. I'm still wondering about Shane Ross in Dublin South, who (AFAIK) didn't go near the subject in his campaign: he's a skeptic on most issues, so I'm guessing he's at least skeptical on religion too. (I do mean guessing - I have no evidence either way!)

Turtwig

magicbastarder wrote: »

michael martin.
well, he probably is now, he'll be wondering why god has deserted him.

To be fair to the guy his daughter passed away just a few months back so I doubt the election will be upsetting him that much.

jayzusb.christ

Emmet Stagg agreed whole-heartedly with me when I wrote to him about the blasphemy law. Not that this means he's an atheist, just that he understands that concept of freedom of speech that FF seemed to have a very flimsy grasp of.

Sorry to hear about MM's daughter, I never knew that.

johnfás

bnt wrote: »

Ivana Bacik didn't make it in, though. I'm still wondering about Shane Ross in Dublin South, who (AFAIK) didn't go near the subject in his campaign: he's a skeptic on most issues, so I'm guessing he's at least skeptical on religion too. (I do mean guessing - I have no evidence either way!)

Shane Ross is a member of the Church of Ireland. On an aside he's also married to the daughter of a Church of Ireland clergyman but that doesn't exactly have any bearing on the fact that he professes to have a faith in the COI, which he does.

Why exactly does it matter? I know atheist politicians who support the right for parents to have choice in education decisions for their children and to have that choice supported by the excheqeur - whether that is to send their child to a denominational or nondenominational school, a coeducational or single gender school, an English language school or a Gaeilscoil. We should of course be cognisant of the fact that the value of the Irish language is also subjective and an individual choice yet there appears not to be the same hostility towards supporting the choices of those parents.

I also don't personally know a single Christian politician who supports a ban on blasphemy, or even believes that it is reasonable possible to define that term. I don't vote for politicians based on their faith, colour or gender. I vote for them on their principles and policies. As a Christian I wouldn't vote for a Christian politician who wanted to maintain the Irish law relating to blasphemy and I wouldn't vote for an atheist politician who wanted to severely limit parental choice in education decisions for their children. I also wouldn't vote for a Christian politician who wanted to do likewise by maintaining the Catholic strangehold on education.

CokaColumbo

Agreed. It makes no difference to me if a candidate or TD is a Jew or a Christian or an Atheist etc. The only thing which bothers me is the type of policies that the candidate espouses.

Dave!

johnfás wrote: »

Shane Ross is a member of the Church of Ireland. On an aside he's also married to the daughter of a Church of Ireland clergyman but that doesn't exactly have any bearing on the fact that he professes to have a faith in the COI, which he does.

Why exactly does it matter? I know atheist politicians who support the right for parents to have choice in education decisions for their children and to have that choice supported by the excheqeur - whether that is to send their child to a denominational or nondenominational school, a coeducational or single gender school, an English language school or a Gaeilscoil. We should of course be cognisant of the fact that the value of the Irish language is also subjective and an individual choice yet there appears not to be the same hostility towards supporting the choices of those parents.

I also don't personally know a single Christian politician who supports a ban on blasphemy, or even believes that it is reasonable possible to define that term. I don't vote for politicians based on their faith, colour or gender. I vote for them on their principles and policies. As a Christian I wouldn't vote for a Christian politician who wanted to maintain the Irish law relating to blasphemy and I wouldn't vote for an atheist politician who wanted to severely limit parental choice in education decisions for their children. I also wouldn't vote for a Christian politician who wanted to do likewise by maintaining the Catholic strangehold on education.

I don't think anyone's claiming it's very important, just interesting. Check out the threads started during the campaign, most people are saying that it's the economy that matters, and they voted on that basis. I certainly did.

Having said that, given the increased number of atheists in the Dail, maybe there'll be a bit of movement on some secular issues.

panda100

Joan Collins and Seamus Healy, as members of the ULA, would most certainly be in favour of complete separation of the church and state. I don't know wether they are atheist or not though.

I say it will be the first time since the formation of the state that a significant amount of TD's will not stand up to say prayers at the start of the dail sessions.

Tim Robbins

johnfás wrote: »

Shane Ross is a member of the Church of Ireland. On an aside he's also married to the daughter of a Church of Ireland clergyman but that doesn't exactly have any bearing on the fact that he professes to have a faith in the COI, which he does.

Why exactly does it matter? I know atheist politicians who support the right for parents to have choice in education decisions for their children and to have that choice supported by the excheqeur - whether that is to send their child to a denominational or nondenominational school, a coeducational or single gender school, an English language school or a Gaeilscoil. We should of course be cognisant of the fact that the value of the Irish language is also subjective and an individual choice yet there appears not to be the same hostility towards supporting the choices of those parents.

I also don't personally know a single Christian politician who supports a ban on blasphemy, or even believes that it is reasonable possible to define that term. I don't vote for politicians based on their faith, colour or gender. I vote for them on their principles and policies. As a Christian I wouldn't vote for a Christian politician who wanted to maintain the Irish law relating to blasphemy and I wouldn't vote for an atheist politician who wanted to severely limit parental choice in education decisions for their children. I also wouldn't vote for a Christian politician who wanted to do likewise by maintaining the Catholic strangehold on education.

Church of Ireland is good. Bertrand Russell, Richard Dawkins and Charles Darwin didn't seem to have any problems developing a questioning mind.

Anything except Catholic who have been the organisation who shafted atheists, homosexuals, anyone who wanted contraceptives or get divorced get the most in this state.

CokaColumbo

I like the Catholic Church. It has a backbone unlike the Anglican church.

CokaColumbo

CokaColumbo wrote: »

I like the Catholic Church. It has a backbone unlike the Anglican church.

*gets popcorn

magicbastarder

CokaColumbo wrote: »

I like the Catholic Church. It has a backbone unlike the Anglican church.

you mean it has evolved vertebrae?

Pygmalion

CokaColumbo wrote: »

I like the Catholic Church. It has a backbone unlike the Anglican church.

Yeah, their continued disregard for gender equality, gay rights and contraception all show serious backbone in this day and age.

They're not nearly as ballsy as the Westboro Baptist Church though, I imagine you're a big fan?

CokaColumbo

Pygmalion wrote: »

Yeah, their continued disregard for gender equality, gay rights and contraception all show serious backbone in this day and age.

They're not nearly as ballsy as the Westboro Baptist Church though, I imagine you're a big fan?

I do think that the Catholic Church displays backbone because the institution does not bend to the irate will of the secularists in Europe which is honourable, in my opinion. It shows moral fortitude and resolve.
The church stands up for itself whilst the Anglican Church neglects and distorts its own doctrine to appease... God only knows who.

Pygmalion

CokaColumbo wrote: »

distorts its own doctrine to appease... God only knows who.

Society?

Dave!

CokaColumbo wrote: »

I do think that the Catholic Church displays backbone because the institution does not bend to the irate will of the secularists in Europe which is honourable, in my opinion. It shows moral fortitude and resolve.
The church stands up for itself whilst the Anglican Church neglects and distorts its own doctrine to appease... God only knows who.

Another word for it -- stubborn?

It also doesn't bend to the will of the people when it comes to things like prosecuting priests who molest children.

Yeah, good old Catholic Church, it certainly has neck.

SarahBM

well I didnt see any of the Christian Solidarity Party getting elected.

religion has no place in politics, and I dont think it should matter what a TDs beliefs are.

Pygmalion

SarahBM wrote: »

religion has no place in politics, and I dont think it should matter what a TDs beliefs are.

Beliefs influence action, especially in politics.

For example (First example I thought of given recent events) one can't reasonably elect someone who believes that there should be no recognition of same-sex marriage, and then expect them to campaign for equal rights and less government interference in people's private lives.

Of course a lot of the Christians in this country don't believe the above, I'm not saying that they all do, but it's going to be a policy opposed on religious grounds by quite a few, so it's not an entirely irrelevant matter.

philologos

CokaColumbo wrote: »

The church stands up for itself whilst the Anglican Church neglects and distorts its own doctrine to appease... God only knows who.

The Anglican Communion (its not a single church) is a diverse communion of churches ranging from the very liberal indeed (Episcopal Church of USA) to the very conservative (Diocese of Sydney in Australia, and most of the churches in the global south). Some are Anglo-Catholic, others are broad church, and others are Evangelical / Reformed (Sydney being an example of this, from experience in the UK there are also a large proportion of Evangelical Anglican congregations and there have been since 18th century). This may be because most decision making is made through General and Diocesan Synod. Indeed, all bishops are elected. Priests / ministers / etc are selected by the Diocese and the Select Vestries of the churches in question (democratically elected committees to serve in the church).

To say that the Anglican Communion distorts doctrine is invalid because each of the individual churches determine what church structure is appropriate, or what they preach. The Book of Common Prayer is the main springboard of discussion and yes the 39 Articles of Religion were key in doctrine and still are in many churches, but they are no means infallible as Papal decrees made ex-cathedra are. Anglicans accept that humans including the Archbishop of Canterbury are clearly fallible and can make mistakes.

You might want to inform yourself about Anglicanism before you continue.

Dades

CokaColumbo wrote: »

I do think that the Catholic Church displays backbone because the institution does not bend to the irate will of the secularists in Europe which is honourable, in my opinion. It shows moral fortitude and resolve.

And that's why there were zero new priests ordained in Dublin this year. And why it's days, in Europe at least, are numbered.

AhSureTisGrand

CokaColumbo wrote: »

I like the Catholic Church. It has a backbone unlike the Anglican church.

I like Colonel Gadaffi. He has backbone unlike that pansy Mubarak

keppler

Pygmalion wrote: »

Beliefs influence action, especially in politics.

For example (First example I thought of given recent events) one can't reasonably elect someone who believes that there should be no recognition of same-sex marriage, and then expect them to campaign for equal rights and less government interference in people's private lives.

You mean reasonable people like this....:D
http://bigmentaldisease.com/humour/michael-healy-rae/

Scroll down and listen to the recording of his views on same sex marriage:eek:

Dave!

Thread of the day!

Pygmalion

Dave! wrote: »

Thread of the day!

Thread of the day for me is about an M60 for sale?

rccaulfield

I think its Very importanat to know. If a person isn't capable of applying rational logic to lifes biggest question then how can i trust them?

AudreyHepburn

We are in the middle of a recession. We need our leaders to concentrate on the Economy before anything else.

The beliefs or lack of of those in government should be and need to be the last thing on anyone's mind right now, especially their own.

robindch

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

The beliefs or lack of of those in government should be and need to be the last thing on anyone's mind right now, especially their own.

So you're in favour of scrapping the prayers in the Dail then?

Jakkass

Jakkass wrote: »

You might want to inform yourself about Anglicanism before you continue.

Why bother? Neither religion actually matters in Ireland or, really, in Europe. It's becoming a quaint institution really. This was an opinion on Anglicanism in the 80's.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBtDIVfhh8k

AudreyHepburn

robindch wrote: »

So you're in favour of scrapping the prayers in the Dail then?

I didn't even know they said prayers in the Dail. Whether they continue to do so or not doesn't really bother me though.

Tim Robbins

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I didn't even know they said prayers in the Dail. Whether they continue to do so or not doesn't really bother me though.

Does it not bother you we have a political culture which favours people who lie about what they believe in rather than just be honest and admit they don't believe?

gbee

jayzusb.christ wrote: »

Sorry to hear about MM's daughter, I never knew that.

A long illness with a predictable outcome, sadly with a sudden turn that the best of Irish or UK medicine could not prevent.

gbee

CokaColumbo wrote: »

which is honourable, in my opinion. It shows moral fortitude and resolve.

You do mean the ROMAN Catholic Church here don't you. Well this church was founded by the dissolving Western Roman Empire in a bid to save themselves from slaughter and live a semblance of their lifestyle that they had been used to as senators and noblemen is the state.

The Roman Empire never wet away you know, they just changed their name.

robindch

gbee wrote: »

You do mean the ROMAN Catholic Church here don't you. Well this church was founded by the dissolving Western Roman Empire in a bid to save themselves from slaughter and live a semblance of their lifestyle that they had been used to as senators and noblemen is the state.

On the offchance that this is really your view, it might be worth your while reading up on Roman history.

Edward Gibbon is worth a few weeks of anybody's time.

CokaColumbo

Jakkass wrote: »

The Anglican Communion (its not a single church) is a diverse communion of churches ranging from the very liberal indeed (Episcopal Church of USA) to the very conservative (Diocese of Sydney in Australia, and most of the churches in the global south). Some are Anglo-Catholic, others are broad church, and others are Evangelical / Reformed (Sydney being an example of this, from experience in the UK there are also a large proportion of Evangelical Anglican congregations and there have been since 18th century). This may be because most decision making is made through General and Diocesan Synod. Indeed, all bishops are elected. Priests / ministers / etc are selected by the Diocese and the Select Vestries of the churches in question (democratically elected committees to serve in the church).

To say that the Anglican Communion distorts doctrine is invalid because each of the individual churches determine what church structure is appropriate, or what they preach. The Book of Common Prayer is the main springboard of discussion and yes the 39 Articles of Religion were key in doctrine and still are in many churches, but they are no means infallible as Papal decrees made ex-cathedra are. Anglicans accept that humans including the Archbishop of Canterbury are clearly fallible and can make mistakes.

You might want to inform yourself about Anglicanism before you continue.

Might I have written the Church of England instead, thou font of knowledge on all things Anglican? Large sections of the CofE have been considering, for a number of years, of returning to the church precisely because their institution doesn't really stand for much anymore.

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

I like Colonel Gadaffi. He has backbone unlike that pansy Mubarak

He does have a backbone and I respect him for that.

Paparazzo

CokaColumbo wrote: »

Might I have written the Church of England instead, thou font of knowledge on all things Anglican? Large sections of the CofE have been considering, for a number of years, of returning to the church precisely because their institution doesn't really stand for much anymore.


He does have a backbone and I respect him for that.

I don't think being afraid to admit you're wrong is an admirable quality

AudreyHepburn

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Does it not bother you we have a political culture which favours people who lie about what they believe in rather than just be honest and admit they don't believe?

In what way does it favour them specifically? And what real difference does it make to you or me personally if they choose to say a prayer before sessions?

I can think of far worse things our government can do and have done tbh.

Ghost Buster

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

In what way does it favour them specifically? And what real difference does it make to you or me personally if they choose to say a prayer before sessions?

I can think of far worse things our government can do and have done tbh.

It is, to put it mildly, darn rude to assume that everybody in the room is Catholic and/or Christian and require that they stand in deference and have theyre time wasted sending a telepathic to a supposed super being who is listening to them.
Also many people, such as I, have abhorrance for the catholic church and resent having it imposed on my day to day life.
Hows about all the Catholic TDs come early and have a nice auld pray for themselves outside the chamber....

panda100

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

We are in the middle of a recession. We need our leaders to concentrate on the Economy before anything else.

The beliefs or lack of of those in government should be and need to be the last thing on anyone's mind right now, especially their own.

I completely disagree and I think the obsession with economics is one of the many reasons we got into such a catastrophic mess in the first place.
The countries with the highest economic turnover are not necessarily the most fairest, equal and best places to live. While economic stratergy is important it should not be the only thing we wish out leaders to concentrate on. I for one would like to see a much more fairer, equal, healthier place to live than Celtic Tiger Ireland. I looked very closely at party's views on equality, mental health, green issues, etc as I think these are just as important, if not more important than economics.

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

In what way does it favour them specifically? And what real difference does it make to you or me personally if they choose to say a prayer before sessions?

I can think of far worse things our government can do and have done tbh.

We live in a mutlicultural Ireland now and our goverment should reflect this, but sadly it does not. We still have predominatly middle aged-men all sitting round saying Our fathers and Hail Marys in our goverment. If we want to be a more progressive, inclusive Ireland then we have to start acting like one, and Christian prayers before dail sessions have to go.

Pace2008

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

And what real difference does it make to you or me personally if they choose to say a prayer before sessions?

It is an assertion of continued Catholic dominance in a country which should be secular. It is wholly unnecessary as these pharisees could be humble Christians and keep their prayers a private issue between themselves and God. If there is honesty in their hearts I'm sure He'll hear them, or something

I can think of far worse things our government can do and have done tbh.

I can think of far better things our government can do and have done tbh. Does that nullify this complete non-argument?

"Sure what harm?" is what has this country ****ed.

robindch

panda100 wrote: »

I completely disagree and I think the obsession with economics is one of the many reasons we got into such a catastrophic mess in the first place.

OK, off-topic I know, but that's not quite true.

Economics is the study of the ebb and flow of goods, services and money within a society and in very broad terms indeed, the advice over last ten years or so of fact-based economists working within the Department of Finance and elsewhere was actively discarded by successive taoisigh and cabinets:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2011/0302/1224291145591.html

If I could pick a single reason for the property crash and concomitant banking problems here in Ireland, it was simply the active rubbishing of the advice of trained economists by people who are untrained in it. An obsession with economics would have helped prevent, rather than actively encouraged, the country's problems.

oldrnwisr

The church stands up for itself whilst the Anglican Church neglects and distorts its own doctrine to appease... God only knows who.

So, I suppose then that the catholic church would never dream of changing their doctrines to respond to changing social attitudes. I wonder then why the church no longer prohibits eating meat on Fridays. I wonder why the centuries old doctrine of fasting for 12 hours before receiving communion was changed to 3 hours by Pope Pius XII in 1953 and to 1 hour by Pope Paul VI in 1966. I wonder why women no longer cover their heads in church, why people no longer receive communion directly in the mouth, why the priest no longer faces east with his back to the congregation.

If that's what a backbone is, they may want to trade it in for something stronger. The church in modern Ireland is so different from the one sixty or more years ago that it is unrecognisable.

ShooterSF

oldrnwisr wrote: »

So, I suppose then that the catholic church would never dream of changing their doctrines to respond to changing social attitudes. I wonder then why the church no longer prohibits eating meat on Fridays. I wonder why the centuries old doctrine of fasting for 12 hours before receiving communion was changed to 3 hours by Pope Pius XII in 1953 and to 1 hour by Pope Paul VI in 1966. I wonder why women no longer cover their heads in church, why people no longer receive communion directly in the mouth, why the priest no longer faces east with his back to the congregation.

Don't forget the abolition of limbo.

oldrnwisr

The reason I didn't mention limbo is that in response to media reports, the church already came out with the well-worn excuse that limbo was never a doctrinal teaching and so the pope's comments didn't differ from the catechism. No doubt if I had I would have had some wonderful gloating retort on that subject.

Tim Robbins

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

In what way does it favour them specifically?

Why else do you think they lie?

And what real difference does it make to you or me personally if they choose to say a prayer before sessions?

Becasue they need to separate objective reality from subjective reality.
Their subjective reality should be kept to themselves.

I would think it ridiculous if 'The God Delusion' was read out before every Dáil sitting.

Galvasean

oldrnwisr wrote: »

The reason I didn't mention limbo is that in response to media reports, the church already came out with the well-worn excuse that limbo was never a doctrinal teaching and so the pope's comments didn't differ from the catechism. No doubt if I had I would have had some wonderful gloating retort on that subject.

^^ I like the new guy :cool:

ShooterSF

Galvasean wrote: »

^^ I like the new guy :cool:

Got a certain chess player mentality!

oldrnwisr

ShooterSF wrote: »

Got a certain chess player mentality!

Galvasean wrote: »

^^ I like the new guy

Thanks guys. It's great to be here.

fisgon

CokaColumbo wrote: »

Large sections of the CofE have been considering, for a number of years, of returning to the church precisely because their institution doesn't really stand for much anymore.
.

Large sections? Really? An exaggeration, i suspect. Don't know a huge amount about the CofE, but I know some Irish protestants, and none of them have ever expressed any interest in catholicism. In fact I know of some people who are going the other way and joining the CofI.

Also, "returning" to the church?

Gregor Samsa

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

We are in the middle of a recession. We need our leaders to concentrate on the Economy before anything else.

The beliefs or lack of of those in government should be and need to be the last thing on anyone's mind right now, especially their own.

Sorry to pull you out personally on this, but I've been hearing it a frequently from lots of people, and I'm getting a bit fed up with this notion that nothing else should be discussed in politics but the economy.

The rest of life still goes on regardless of the bailout, the deficit, and all the rest of it.

The lack of full gay marriage rights for citizens of this country is still an injustice whether there's 0.1% or 25% unemployment.

The disproportionate influence the Catholic Church has on our publicly funded school system is still an outrage regardless of how much we're in hock to the IMF.

These things affect real people in a real way, and they shouldn't be brushed under the carpet simply because of our economic woes.