Not baptising your child - what are the practical disadvantages in Ireland?

Banbh

Well said Shooter! We owe a debt of gratitude to the many thousands who defied the power of the church and were often forced to emigrate.

I recall the little things in my own life - refusing to let a priest splash me with water before my appendix operation, refusing to stand to be blessed at a trade union conference, refusing to kneel for a visiting bishop at a workplace. Small potatoes I know, but without resistance there would have been no progress.

The church has fought tooth and nail - and is still fighting - to hold on to all its privileges.

skyfall2012

What will happen when the Catholic Church is gone from Irish society, will we be like the Israelites, when Moses went to the mountain to fetch the 10 commandments, will we become dionysian (I hope this is the correct use of this word), because we will no longer have a organisation proclaiming that they know how to live a morally good life and when that essentially good message is taken out of the schools when religion class is no longer. What will happen to our society, I would worry that T.V. might become our new God and we start to take our moral code from the programmes we watch e.g. LOVE/HATE, Eastenders... Please tell me I am wrong!

swampgas

skyfall2012 wrote: »

What will happen when the Catholic Church is gone from Irish society, will we be like the Israelites, when Moses went to the mountain to fetch the 10 commandments, will we become dionysian (I hope this is the correct use of this word), because we will no longer have a organisation proclaiming that they know how to live a morally good life and when that essentially good message is taken out of the schools when religion class is no longer. What will happen to our society, I would worry that T.V. might become our new God and we start to take our moral code from the programmes we watch e.g. LOVE/HATE, Eastenders... Please tell me I am wrong!

You are wrong.

The sooner we stop abasing ourselves to a corrupt church with obscene wealth that has tried to hide the systematic abuse of children, and start thinking for ourselves, and making ethical choices for ourselves, the better.

skyfall2012

swampgas wrote: »

You are wrong.

The sooner we stop abasing ourselves to a corrupt church with obscene wealth that has tried to hide the systematic abuse of children, and start thinking for ourselves, and making ethical choices for ourselves, the better.

I agree. But, I don't think that is how society works. We need leadership in these areas, that is why the Church has had such immense power for thousands of years. How is that vacuum going to be filled?

swampgas

skyfall2012 wrote: »

I agree. But, I don't think that is how society works. We need leadership in these areas, that is why the Church has had such immense power for thousands of years. How is that vacuum going to be filled?

Do we really need leadership to know right from wrong? Use your conscience, man! There is no vacuum - you should never ever abdicate responsibility for deciding what is right and what is wrong to someone else - be it church, be it leader.

IMO everyone has a responsibility to make ethical decisions for themselves.

skyfall2012

swampgas wrote: »

Do we really need leadership to know right from wrong? Use your conscience, man! There is no vacuum - you should never ever abdicate responsibility for deciding what is right and what is wrong to someone else - be it church, be it leader.

IMO everyone has a responsibility to make ethical decisions for themselves.

You are assuming that everyone is brought up like you, some people are not thought right from wrong by their parents, what happens to them? They will not get enlightenment from anywhere else except maybe the television.

Bannasidhe

skyfall2012 wrote: »

I agree. But, I don't think that is how society works. We need leadership in these areas, that is why the Church has had such immense power for thousands of years. How is that vacuum going to be filled?

The RCC had immense power for around 1500 years max - power it clung to by suppressing dissent through mechanisms such as the Inquisition, Crusades against 'heresy' in Europe, murder, torture, censorship, control of information and education.

Totalitarian regimes also provided strong 'guidance' and 'stability' by using the exact same tactics. Do you think we should have a dictatorship?

swampgas

skyfall2012 wrote: »

You are assuming that everyone is brought up like you, some people are not thought right from wrong by their parents, what happens to them? They will not get enlightenment from anywhere else except maybe the television.

I think you might be underestimating people. You don't need enlightenment, you just need some empathy and a sense of fair play.

All the same I think it would be good to replace the catechism and religion in schools with some classes discussing ethics.

Bannasidhe

skyfall2012 wrote: »

You are assuming that everyone is brought up like you, some people are not thought right from wrong by their parents, what happens to them? They will not get enlightenment from anywhere else except maybe the television.

What guidance do they get from the RCC now?
That it is ok to protect child abusers?
That it is acceptable to refuse to pay compensation to victims of clerical abuse while owning countless priceless works of art?
That it is ok to force people who do not share your beliefs to abide by them?

That it is ok to say you are the moral guardian of society while doing all of the above?

skyfall2012

Bannasidhe wrote: »

The RCC had immense power for around 1500 years max - power it clung to by suppressing dissent through mechanisms such as the Inquisition, Crusades against 'heresy' in Europe, murder, torture, censorship, control of information and education.

Totalitarian regimes also provided strong 'guidance' and 'stability' by using the exact same tactics. Do you think we should have a dictatorship?

So what are you suggesting? How do you see this all working out? To answer your question, history has shown us that dictatorships don't work very well, so I wouldn't be promoting that idea. But history has also shown us that we always need Gods e.g. Sun Gods, God of this, God of that and somebody usually takes control of interpreting these Gods.

skyfall2012

Bannasidhe wrote: »

What guidance do they get from the RCC now?
That it is ok to protect child abusers?
That it is acceptable to refuse to pay compensation to victims of clerical abuse while owning countless priceless works of art?
That it is ok to force people who do not share your beliefs to abide by them?

That it is ok to say you are the moral guardian of society while doing all of the above?

Spare me. I already agree that they are not the ones for the job. But, you cannot deny that somebody else will jump into their shoes. Somebody with another book and who knows of some dead guy who was a magician/hypnotist.

Dades

skyfall2012 wrote: »

So what are you suggesting? How do you see this all working out? To answer your question, history has shown us that dictatorships don't work very well, so I wouldn't be promoting that idea. But history has also shown us that we always need Gods e.g. Sun Gods, God of this, God of that and somebody usually takes control of interpreting these Gods.

Have you never read science-fiction?! In the future humanity won't need gods. Yes, the current, older crop of humans might be left with a void without it, but the next generation, or the one after that won't.

The Scandinavians seem to getting on great with widespread lack of belief. Don't fall for the religious propaganda that's been fed us forever that we need gods. We need good laws, relevant to the society they apply to, and an educated, fed, population.

swampgas

skyfall2012 wrote: »

So what are you suggesting? How do you see this all working out? To answer your question, history has shown us that dictatorships don't work very well, so I wouldn't be promoting that idea. But history has also shown us that we always need Gods e.g. Sun Gods, God of this, God of that and somebody usually takes control of interpreting these Gods.

Culture & societal norms tend to influence behavior more than you might think. Just because organised religion is on the wane doesn't mean people don't have any idea as to what's acceptable behavior or not.

Bannasidhe

skyfall2012 wrote: »

So what are you suggesting? How do you see this all working out? To answer your question, history has shown us that dictatorships don't work very well, so I wouldn't be promoting that idea. But history has also shown us that we always need Gods e.g. Sun Gods, God of this, God of that and somebody usually takes control of interpreting these Gods.

Has it? - it depends on how you define 'works'.

We do not need 'Gods' - we are taught that we need 'Gods' by the very people who claim to speak for these 'Gods' - do you always fall for the adverts?

skyfall2012

swampgas wrote: »

I think you might be underestimating people. You don't need enlightenment, you just need some empathy and a sense of fair play.

All the same I think it would be good to replace the catechism and religion in schools with some classes discussing ethics.

Well, I just have to turn on the news to know I am not underestimating people.

Absolutely, I agree totally with that idea. But, I think this would have to be understood on the removal of religion class, that something like that would have to replace it.

Bannasidhe

skyfall2012 wrote: »

Spare me. I already agree that they are not the ones for the job. But, you cannot deny that somebody else will jump into their shoes. Somebody with another book and who knows of some dead guy who was a magician/hypnotist.

So we should keep the current corrupt crowd in case something worse replaces them? :eek:

Bring back Bertie in that case....

skyfall2012

Bannasidhe wrote: »

So we should keep the current corrupt crowd in case something worse replaces them? :eek:

Bring back Bertie in that case....

No. But, maybe we should be discussing what would replace them. Look at the bigger picture. Otherwise, we might end up right back where we started.

Bannasidhe

skyfall2012 wrote: »

No. But, maybe we should be discussing what would replace them. Look at the bigger picture. Otherwise, we might end up right back where we started.

Where did we start exactly?

swampgas

skyfall2012 wrote: »

Well, I just have to turn on the news to know I am not underestimating people.

If you mean that people are often badly behaved, well, there always has been bad behavior, regardless of whichever religions might have been holding sway.

Murder, rape, torture, theft, you name it - do you think these can be suppressed by religion? History might suggest otherwise.

Bannasidhe

swampgas wrote: »

If you mean that people are often badly behaved, well, there always has been bad behavior, regardless of whichever religions might have been holding sway.

Murder, rape, torture, theft, you name it - do you think these can be suppressed by religion? History might suggest otherwise.

It does indeed.

Certain religious individuals have attempted to suppress the baser human instincts, even some religious denominations such as the Quakers - but no religion which is in a position of power as an institution ever has - they have all suppressed those who do not follow them regardless of whether these people are 'good' or 'bad' by any ethical standard.

The Abrahamic religions (Christianity/Judiasm/Islam) being the most committed in this respect.

Edit - quoted swampgas but wrote as if responding to skyfall by mistake...

swampgas

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Does it?

Now, I could drag this out and ask where you learned that version of history - was in in a Catholic school by any chance? etc etc but to be fair I should be honest here and tell you I am a history lecturer in an Irish university and no - religion has not suppressed the baser impulses of human beings, it has consistently harnessed them and used them to ensure they maintained control.

Certain religious individuals have, even some religious denominations such as the Quakers - but no religion which is in a position of power as an institution ever has - they have all suppressed those who do not follow them regardless of whether these people are 'good' or 'bad' by any ethical standard.

The Abrahamic religions (Christianity/Judiasm/Islam) being the most committed in this respect.

Maybe I didn't express myself clearly - I thought I was implying exactly what you just described in some detail

Bannasidhe

swampgas wrote: »

Maybe I didn't express myself clearly - I thought I was implying exactly what you just described in some detail

You were - my profound apologies.

I edited when I realised but my ninja skills have been diminished by middle age...

skyfall2012

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Where did we start exactly?

What I mean with that statement, is that we could end up with another religion not unlike Roman Catholic Church, filling their shoes.

Bannasidhe

skyfall2012 wrote: »

What I mean with that statement, is that we could end up with another religion not unlike Roman Catholic Church, filling their shoes.

Could we?

France completely separated the church from the State in 1905. I see no evidence of another religion stepping into the position of power once held by the RCC in France.

Australia is the same.

Japan.

The United States.

No. It is not inevitable.

skyfall2012

swampgas wrote: »

If you mean that people are often badly behaved, well, there always has been bad behavior, regardless of whichever religions might have been holding sway.

Murder, rape, torture, theft, you name it - do you think these can be suppressed by religion? History might suggest otherwise.

I am not suggesting another religion, but I am open to suggestion. I think the ethical classes are a good suggestion

skyfall2012

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Could we?

France completely separated the church from the State in 1905. I see no evidence of another religion stepping into the position of power once held by the RCC in France.

Australia is the same.

Japan.

The United States.

No. It is not inevitable.

Ok cool, I wasn't aware of these, thanks for educating me. Although, you will find if you talk to people who were brought up without religion, that they wish, that they had something. I don't think the replacement would happen instantly, it would take time maybe not in our lifetime. But, we should look out for future generations.

Bannasidhe

skyfall2012 wrote: »

Ok cool, I wasn't aware of these, thanks for educating me. Although, you will find if you talk to people who were brought up without religion, that they wish, that they had something. I don't think the replacement would happen instantly, it would take time maybe not in our lifetime. But, we should look out for future generations.

I know many people who were brought up without religion. My own son was one.

None of them have ever expressed a lack of 'something' - indeed all the ones I know are extremely moral and ethical people - which is not something I can say about all the religious people I know...

In Ireland most of our education system is controlled by the RCC which teaches us that without them we would become barbaric and lack moral guidance. That civilization itself would collapse - the truth is, it won't not just because civilization existed long before Christianity but because people can and do live without religion in a moral and ethical way and being religious has never stopped anyone from being evil.

It's a bit like if all the schools were controlled by Tayto. The Tayto priests told us that we would die if we didn't eat a bag of Tayto a day. That we would die if we ate Walkers as they were the 'wrong' crisps but still better than popcorn which was completely the wrong kind of salty snack food.

Everyday as children we are taught that only Tayto can keep us alive.

But some people discover that in fact Tayto are so saturated with fat that they are killing us. For centuries, Tayto was able to have these people put to death (along with the Walkers/popcorn/nachos etc etc eaters) but as people became more aware about diet and the effects of fat on our health more and more people began to question what the Tayto priests said.

Whole countries turned away from Tayto and began to eat Walkers. Many people began to say 'actually, Walkers are just as bad for the heath as Tayto. I am not going to eat any crisps. In fact, now that I look at the facts - all salty snacks are equally bad and I do not want my children being forced to eat a bag of this saturated fat everyday which is paid for out of my taxes.'

Some countries, like France, said 'Ok - no salty snack foods of any kind will be paid for by the State from now on. If people want their children to eat salty snacks they will have to pay for them themselves.'

Now, the people have a choice - they can eat whatever salty snack takes their fancy if they wish - but nobody can force them to if they do not want to.

skyfall2012

Dades wrote: »

Have you never read science-fiction?! In the future humanity won't need gods. Yes, the current, older crop of humans might be left with a void without it, but the next generation, or the one after that won't.

The Scandinavians seem to getting on great with widespread lack of belief. Don't fall for the religious propaganda that's been fed us forever that we need gods. We need good laws, relevant to the society they apply to, and an educated, fed, population.

Hi Dades, didn't you hear that Norway has one of the highest rates of suicide in Europe and that suicide is very low in religious groups. Now don't have me sound like I am promoting religion, but you got to admit, we need something to believe in and anything science fiction I have seen -mostly recently 'The Divide'- show the future is not bright, because of our self serving ways.

skyfall2012

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I know many people who were brought up without religion. My own son was one.

None of them have ever expressed a lack of 'something' - indeed all the ones I know are extremely moral and ethical people - which is not something I can say about all the religious people I know...

In Ireland most of our education system is controlled by the RCC which teaches us that without them we would become barbaric and lack moral guidance. That civilization itself would collapse - the truth is, it won't not just because civilization existed long before Christianity but because people can and do live without religion in a moral and ethical way and being religious has never stopped anyone from being evil.

It's a bit like if all the schools were controlled by Tayto. The Tayto priests told us that we would die if we didn't eat a bag of Tayto a day. That we would die if we ate Walkers as they were the 'wrong' crisps but still better than popcorn which was completely the wrong kind of salty snack food.

Everyday as children we are taught that only Tayto can keep us alive.

But some people discover that in fact Tayto are so saturated with fat that they are killing us. For centuries, Tayto was able to have these people put to death (along with the Walkers/popcorn/nachos etc etc eaters) but as people became more aware about diet and the effects of fat on our health more and more people began to question what the Tayto priests said.

Whole countries turned away from Tayto and began to eat Walkers. Many people began to say 'actually, Walkers are just as bad for the heath as Tayto. I am not going to eat any crisps. In fact, now that I look at the facts - all salty snacks are equally bad and I do not want my children being forced to eat a bag of this saturated fat everyday which is paid for out of my taxes.'

Some countries, like France, said 'Ok - no salty snack foods of any kind will be paid for by the State from now on. If people want their children to eat salty snacks they will have to pay for them themselves.'

Now, the people have a choice - they can eat whatever salty snack takes their fancy if they wish - but nobody can force them to if they do not want to.

Is this how you reply to your students when they try to understand your lectures?

lazygal

All I know is that I really want a bag of crisps right now.