Ireland now in top ten atheist countries

Kiwi in IE

"Ireland is loosing it's religion"

Can it be completed before we are forced to send our son to a Catholic school next September?

Sarky

Zillah wrote: »

PDN is an evangelical pastor that posts here on boards, and used to pop over to A&A to unctuously pontificate about the failings of non-theism. Doesn't come round much any more. He has stated in the past that they are winning quite a few converts in Ireland.

It's his prize-winning attitude. The masses simply can't resist it.

1stimpressions

Zillah wrote: »

As I alluded to, the Irish 20-35 band is currently in the throes of post-modern post-Catholic bullshit wherein it is cool to say that organised religion is a bad thing, but its great to still believe in all manner of ill-defined, pseudo-spiritual horse tripe, influenced by half-baked, barely understood, condescendingly-adopted pilferings from world religions and inarticulate existential angsty home-brewed crap-thoughts mumbled out over a cup of tea or a fifth glass of white wine, resulting in a preposterous, mangled, inbred paradigm that hasn't the slightest degree of credibility, reflection, consistency or dignity.

I did not realise until this moment how annoyed by that I am.

Yes, yes and thrice yes. People get really defensive when you ask them about any of it too. They realise the shaky ground they are on.

bobs knobs

AstraMonti wrote: »

I think one of the most interesting thing in the survey is the part that compares how religious or not you are with the level of education. The higher the education the higher are the non-religious/atheist percentages.

http://archive.org/details/GC104

there's yer science. science is a religeon too because it takes faith to believe the big bang theory etc....

legspin

bobs knobs wrote: »

http://archive.org/details/GC104

there's yer science. science is a religeon too because it takes faith to believe the big bang theory etc....

Obvious troll is obvious.

bobs knobs

legspin wrote: »

Obvious troll is obvious.

did you bother watching the video before sticking a label on?

endacl

bobs knobs wrote: »

there's yer science. science is a religeon too because it takes faith to believe the big bang theory etc....

And science is atheism is a religion is an icecream.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

pontia

if this is the highlight of your day you really need to get out more often

legspin

bobs knobs wrote: »

did you bother watching the video before sticking a label on?

I've seen it before and it is still bullshít.

bobs knobs

legspin wrote: »

I've seen it before and it is still bullshít.

well that's professors for you always bull****ting.

Dades

bobs knobs wrote: »

did you bother watching the video before sticking a label on?

Of course. Your throwaway one-liner convinced me to watch an hour-long video utterly misrepresenting or failing to understand the material it's trying to discredit.

bobs knobs, if you want to talk creationism, there's a thread here where people can peddle their nonsense.

No more on this thread.

Duggys Housemate

Zillah wrote: »

As I alluded to, the Irish 20-35 band is currently in the throes of post-modern post-Catholic bullshit wherein it is cool to say that organised religion is a bad thing, but its great to still believe in all manner of ill-defined, pseudo-spiritual horse tripe, influenced by half-baked, barely understood, condescendingly-adopted pilferings from world religions and inarticulate existential angsty home-brewed crap-thoughts mumbled out over a cup of tea or a fifth glass of white wine, resulting in a preposterous, mangled, inbred paradigm that hasn't the slightest degree of credibility, reflection, consistency or dignity.

I did not realise until this moment how annoyed by that I am.

You need to learn to live and let live.

Dades

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

You need to learn to live and let live.

Said without a trace of irony.

Duggys Housemate

I think this thread explains why, if most people are trendign non-religious nevertheless the modern atheist is strongly disliked. If someone not of organized religion has a woolly view of the world, or some kind of spiritual belief, and along with that strong liberal views - which would be common - I can't fathom why anybody would get upset by that.

Duggys Housemate

Dades wrote: »

Said without a trace of irony.

Why would it be "ironic".

seamus

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Why would it be "ironic".

Because religious lobbies do not "live and let live". They attempt to influence public policy at every turn and tell people the correct way to live their lives.

Duggys Housemate

seamus wrote: »

Because religious lobbies do not "live and let live". They attempt to influence public policy at every turn and tell people the correct way to live their lives.

And whats that got to do with my comment? Or anything. Presumably strong religious people are also opposed to the spiritual wooly thinking of new any post Catholics, however their bigotry does not preclude other people's bigotry.

Dades

An awful lot of the woolly spiritual types that keep ticking catholic on the census form? They perpetuate the notion that Ireland is still a "catholic country".

It's always ironic when suggesting that atheists should live and let live. If religion wasn't so ingrained in the system we all share there would be no such thing as "new atheists". We'd all just be 'people'.

Mahogany

Athiesm is just as bad, again an imposition on what people need to think.

Agnosticism is the way forward.

Obliq

Mahogany wrote: »

Athiesm is just as bad, again an imposition on what people need to think.

Agnosticism is the way forward.

Show me an atheist who is imposing their belief on you. And by saying "what people need to think" you are doing just that, btw.

Mahogany

Obliq wrote: »

Show me an atheist who is imposing their belief on you. And by saying "what people need to think" you are doing just that, btw.

I know a few people that are Athiests and they would be telling me its 100% the correct way to think etc.

No sorry. I'm just not saying what you need to think, I'm saying what i think is the way forward.

Dades

Mahogany wrote: »

Athiesm is just as bad, again an imposition on what people need to think.

Agnosticism is the way forward.

Congratulations on completely misunderstanding both terms!

You're not going to like it here.

Mahogany wrote: »

I know a few people that are Athiests and they would be telling me its 100% the correct way to think etc.

They're 100% wrong to say that.

Obliq

Hey, I had to be shown stuff like this too! :





My definitions were arsewise when I attempted to explain them the first time. Sounds like mahogany's friends haven't seen them either.....

Mahogany

Dades wrote: »

Congratulations on completely misunderstanding both terms!

You're not going to like it here.

They're 100% wrong to say that.

Athiesm is the belief that there is definetly no God, how am I wrong?

Agnosticism says that we should be open to the idea of Thiesm however does not impose that is the correct way forward.

Dades

Mahogany wrote: »

Athiesm is the belief that there is definetly no God, how am I wrong?

There's no "definitely" involved. It's the belief there is no gods, or put better, a lack of belief in god(s). There's no 'probability' involved.

Mahogany wrote: »

Agnosticism says that we should be open to the idea of Thiesm however does not impose that is the correct way forward.

Neither terms suggests imposing anything. Agnosticism suggests the answer to the question of god(s) is unknowable.

Hence, it's possible to be an agnostic atheist... i.e. you lack belief in god(s) but accept the unknowability of the answer. In fact most people posting here would admit to being agnostic atheists - because you cannot disprove an invisible, intangible god any more than you can an invisible intangible unicorn.

Some people subscribe to a scale of sorts of atheism. You're buddies who claim to be 100% correct, are are the extreme end, and have chosen for practical purposes to ignore that you cannot disprove something like a god.

Hope this helps.

pauldla

Mahogany wrote: »

Athiesm is the belief that there is definetly no God, how am I wrong?

Agnosticism says that we should be open to the idea of Thiesm however does not impose that is the correct way forward.

Obliq's chart above should help clarify.

seamus

Mahogany wrote: »

Athiesm is the belief that there is definetly no God, how am I wrong?

Like "Asexual" is not a refusal or denial of sex, "Athiest" is not the refusal or denial of theism, rather the state of being without a belief in God.

The word itself states nothing about certainty or other beliefs.

Agnostic is the opposite of "Gnostic", which is the conviction that one posesses knowledge. Therefore "Agnostic" is the lack of such a conviction.

Therefore it is possible to be agnostic and atheist. Or agnostic and theist. Agnostic is not a form of religious belief.

Mark Hamill

Mahogany wrote: »

I know a few people that are Athiests and they would be telling me its 100% the correct way to think etc.

And do they say that everyone must think that? Do they say that atheism has to be taught in schools?

CRM Ireland

Dades wrote: »

There's no "definitely" involved. It's the belief there is no gods, or put better, a lack of belief in god(s). There's no 'probability' involved.

I just find it utterly amazing the concept of "God" and all religions isnt mocked and ridiculed the way it deserves to be. Its so incredibly ridiculous on every single level that I find it quite unbearable when believers feel pity for me when I say I dont believe in God.

What astonishes me is the percentage around the world who are religious and believe in some form of God. How can it be that such intelligent beings could be lead in such a manner? There is so much talk about conspiracy theories about aliens and Government agendas etc, they should focus more on religion and how it is that something so fantastical is being believed my billions of our planets inhabitants.

I shouldn't even start talking about this subject, because whenever these things get discussed, I find myself disgusted and embarrassed by seemingly intelligent and informed friends trying to convince me that there must be a God, or at least something....I find myself looking at them desperately trying to hide my contempt.

Most non-believers I know generally say they dont care what others believe, and its up to them. We have become conditioned to think like this, because it would seem to be rude or selfish to impose our non-belief upon them. Why is that though? Ive had numerous people in my short life trying to convince me of a God, being told I will be living in eternal hell if I dont believe.....

If, for example, Christianity was invented today as a new way of thinking, everyone would be up in arms about it, warning people to stay away saying its just a cult trying to brainwash you. It would seem the right thing to do as a parent, to actively protect your child from it. What is the difference between Christianity and your typical cult?

My parents raised me and said I can believe in what I want. They dont believe in God, but they never suggested I shouldnt. Obviously it hard not to be influenced by your parents, so thats most likely why I didnt start to believe as a child. If I have any children, I will actively protect them against all religions and inform them of the facts, rather than the catalogue of lies being force feed into kids at school etc.

Galvasean

Damn militant agnostics....