An Atheist's Alienation

dceire

I was baptised and raised as a Catholic in a fairly typical Irish household. However, as soon as I reached my teens, I felt that religion held no place in my life as I did not believe it held any truth and I had no need for it in my life. I had myself removed from the church officially, removing my name from baptismal records. My family are very open and accept my choice while, my parents at least, continue to enjoy their faith. Close friends also care not that I am an atheist, as indeed, some of them are too; at least to some degree.

I do, however, encounter quite a bit of ignorance and intolerance towards my beliefs, or lack there of, in general Irish society. While most people, upon hearing of my beliefs, do not change their overall opinion of me, it is generally received with a mixture of shock, disbelief, denial, and disgust; indeed, I have been asked by a former female colleague why i don't just 'kill myself' if I don't believe in anything. Many also see this as a phase and think that I will 'return to my senses' someday. I try to be as respectful as possible to other people, and their own beliefs, while not shying away from my own; I can find this difficult at times, particularly when older generation people are concerned. People who are 'stuck in their ways' and for whom you are expected to put up a charade.

I try, as much as possible, not to force my beliefs and thoughts about religion upon others; as I would never wish anyone to force their's upon me. However, I find people trying to force religion down my throat time and time again. I encounter a lot of intolerance and disrespect for my beliefs over the course of my everyday life; as if my beliefs are foolish, hold no value, and deserve no respect. I was never a Catholic, just a child of catholic parents, and I've considered myself an Atheist for over a decade now. All I ask is for MY beliefs to be accepted and respected. Is this really so much to ask for? After all, haven't various religions played the respect card over and over again for centuries, if not millennia, now.

I'd really like to hear if any other folk on here experience such xenophobia; and how you personally deal with it?

grindle

I place ignorant people into the 'Ignorant People' box inside my brain and ignore them from then on.
Patronising smile and nodding of head if forced to listen to moronic claptrap, always on the lookout for an escape route to halt the stupidity vacuum from hoovering up the last of my brain cells.

5uspect

Whenever someone asks me why I don't kill myself or don't go raping and murdering I gently remind them that it says a lot more about them than it does about me.

Fortyniner

I will not accept any such treatment. If attacked, I'll attack. As more and more atheists/agnostic/doubters speak up, the less acceptable such behaviour will be.

grindle

Fortyniner wrote: »

As more and more atheists/agnostic/doubters speak up, the less acceptable such behaviour will be.

To a point. There's a sizeable majority of atheists who find atheists defending their thoughts as distasteful as a religious zealot defending the indefensible.

Just look at the backlash against Dawkins within atheist circles. Doesn't make sense to me, but it's a reality.

The general (ignorant) consensus seems to be that an atheist defending their position and dismantling the believer's fairy-tale beliefs is mean or aggressive or innately patronising somehow. An atheist is "supposed" to just go "Oh really? That's nice. I'm an atheist." and enter radio silence.
I can see how it could look patronising, to call a made-up spade a made-up spade as if it should be obvious to the made-up spade worshippers - then again, insisting the made-up spade is an all-powerful universe-creating spade with an absurdly liquid and contradictory code of ethics is much more patronising and hilariously stupid to boot.
You know what they say about arguing with fools.

magicbastarder

dceire wrote: »

I have been asked by a former female colleague why i don't just 'kill myself' if I don't believe in anything. Many also see this as a phase and think that I will 'return to my senses' someday.

mind me asking how old you are?
just wondering if they're adopting a nice patronising 'ah sure, you're just young and it's a phase' sort of attitude.

JuliusCaesar

I haven't encountered much opposition to my atheism at all.

In school, early 70s, a girl said that if I was trapped in a burning house with no way out, I'd say "Jesus!" I pointed out that I'd be just as likely to say "F*ck!", with exactly the same meaning or intention.

I'm still slightly incredulous that people believe in a god.



Here's a nice link.

eviltwin

Yeah to an extent I get it and mostly from young people who I would expect to be a little more broad minded. Older people have been very accepting. Some of the things I have had put to me is am I not worried about being a bad example to my kids, why am I celebrating Christmas, am I atheist because I was abused by a priest, its a "phase", I'm just doing it to be a rebel....

The most annoying has to be from my peers though who call me "brave", they still can't bring themselves to admit to their parents they no longer go to mass on a sunday let alone don't believe.

I'm 35, I haven't believed in God since my early teens, I have been atheist for a long time but has just in the last 3-4 years started publically identifying myself as one.

I expected comments alright, I'm the first person I know in the family and my circle of friends to say I don't believe in God....I had just hoped at this stage people would just get over it.

Akrasia

For me, whenever anyone brings up a theological Moral or philosophical query about why I am an atheist, I am more than confident that I can defend my position.


I generally tend to avoid the conversation with religious people because of the likelyhood that I will end up offending them and I don't want to go around ruining relationships or making people feel bad. (not through any deliberate insult, but because people tend to take questioning of some of their own beliefs as a personal attack (there is an insecurity there, 'If you think My beliefs are implausible, then you must think I am stupid for believing them')

Dirk Gently

Do you work in a church or something? I'm just wondering how alienation would be an every day thing with you, unless you go out of your way to ask everyone their beliefs when you meet them? I'm an atheist a long time and it's very very rare the topic ever comes up with anyone tbh. I'd imagine if I greeted everyone with "hi, I'm an atheist, how do you like those apples" then sure, people might question me about it but generally it doesn't come up at all.

username123

eviltwin wrote: »

I'm 35, I haven't believed in God since my early teens, I have been atheist for a long time but has just in the last 3-4 years started publically identifying myself as one.

Do you mind if I ask you what you mean by this?

I am a little older than you, have been Atheist since I was a teenager, but while I tell if Im asked, I dont tend to announce it to people out of the blue so not really sure how many people would be aware of it. Certainly I have made statements like "I didnt get married in a church because I dont believe in God" or told a funny story about religious people at the door, but in terms of publically identifying as Atheist - do you mean something other than just saying it if asked?

I cant say Ive ever had any kind of reaction to it at all except some people agreeing that they feel the same. Maybe incredulousness from two ladies from the church at the front door who insisted they would leave a card because if I had children Id need the church?!? But other than that its not something that people comment on, possibly because its not something I bring up specifically.

Just wondering if thats what you meant by publically identifying (or if Im missing some fun public statement I should be making!).

iDave

If asked again to kill yourself why dont you ask them to kill themselves if they're so confident the eternal never ending bliss of paradise is waiting for them when they die. If they say they're worried about going to hell then tell them not to be promoting suicide to strangers and be more respectful to people who dont agree with them.

Motopepe

I had myself removed from the church officially, removing my name from baptismal records.

curious...how did you go about this and what obstacles did you encounter, if any?

Bannasidhe

Motopepe wrote: »

curious...how did you go about this and what obstacles did you encounter, if any?

No longer possible - there was some classic goalpost moving on the part of the RCC.

Peregrinus

Bannasidhe wrote: »

No longer possible - there was some classic goalpost moving on the part of the RCC.

May or may not be possible, depending on the practice of the diocese in which you were baptised.

Bannasidhe

Peregrinus wrote: »

May or may not be possible, depending on the practice of the diocese in which you were baptised.

Then why are these Evangelical Christians saying it is impossible?

An official from the Roman Catholic Church says that it is "impossible" to undergo "de-baptism" as a growing number of people in Western Europe and the United States request such a process.
Jeannine Marino, program specialist for evangelization & catechesis at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, told CP that atheists who seek to be "de-baptized" or "un-baptized" cannot technically do so.
"From the Church's perspective, it is impossible to 'un-baptize' or 'de-baptize' someone because we believe that baptism permanently seals the person to Christ and the Church," said Marino.
"People can stop participating in the Church, but we believe the grace of the sacrament has marked them forever."
Marino explains that with baptism, "no matter how long they have been away from the Church" an individual "can return to the faith."
"If the request to be 'de-baptized' is meant to have one's name removed from the baptismal records, this would not be allowed since the baptismal record is a record of historical facts," said Marino.

Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/catholic-church-says-de-baptism-is-impossible-68280/#V5ZVRXmZFr1kwXIE.99

Date Protection Commissioner also says it is not possible.

I received a complaint during 2003 from an individual living in the Netherlands who stated that he had contacted the parish priest in a Catholic church in Ireland where as a baby he believed he had been baptised in 1978. He had requested to have his name removed from church records and that his request had been refused on the grounds that it was not possible to be removed from the church register. He stated that he never joined the Catholic church; his parents had enrolled him without his consent; he now wished to distance himself from it and there was no longer any need for the church to keep information about him.
On investigation of the complaint, the Parish Priest advised my office that a thorough search of the Baptismal Registers for the year in question and for the years before and after that, had failed to reveal a record of the complainant’s baptism. The Priest came to the conclusion that it appeared that the complainant may not have been baptised in that parish, and advised that should he provide documentary evidence, for example, a copy of a Baptismal Certificate, then the matter would be investigated further. He also indicated that he would be willing to note the record that the person no longer wished to be associated with the catholic church or to be classed as a catholic.


With regard to his request to have his data deleted from the Register, should the relevant record be identified by him, it is my understanding that the data could not be deleted from the Register as it is essential for the administration of Church affairs to maintain a register of all the people who have been baptised. Indeed it is of course a factual record of an event that happened. However the proposed noting of the register would more than comply with Section 6 of the Data Protection Acts, 1988 and 2003. I considered the approach taken by the Parish Priest to be both appropriate and considerate.

I communicated this information to the complainant but the matter has not been pursued further.

http://www.dataprotection.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=107&StartDate=1+January+2009.

Can you provide me with examples of where it is possible to have one's name removed from the Baptismal Register?
More out of interest as you say it is possible - I had it done before the goalposts moved.

eviltwin

username123 wrote: »

Do you mind if I ask you what you mean by this?

I am a little older than you, have been Atheist since I was a teenager, but while I tell if Im asked, I dont tend to announce it to people out of the blue so not really sure how many people would be aware of it. Certainly I have made statements like "I didnt get married in a church because I dont believe in God" or told a funny story about religious people at the door, but in terms of publically identifying as Atheist - do you mean something other than just saying it if asked?

I cant say Ive ever had any kind of reaction to it at all except some people agreeing that they feel the same. Maybe incredulousness from two ladies from the church at the front door who insisted they would leave a card because if I had children Id need the church?!? But other than that its not something that people comment on, possibly because its not something I bring up specifically.

Just wondering if thats what you meant by publically identifying (or if Im missing some fun public statement I should be making!).

I suppose its comes from the decision myself and my husband made not to bapthise our youngest child. Because the eldest was and because we come from Catholic families it was just assumed it would happen. When people asked us why we chose not to do it we told them the truth, we don't believe in god and that's when the comments started.

I didn't actually expect it to be a big deal, I don't take more than a passing interest in other people's beliefs but people, or at least some of the people I know , have this endless fascination with it.

username123

eviltwin wrote: »

I suppose its comes from the decision myself and my husband made not to bapthise our youngest child. Because the eldest was and because we come from Catholic families it was just assumed it would happen. When people asked us why we chose not to do it we told them the truth, we don't believe in god and that's when the comments started.

Ah I understand, I suppose there would have been a few comments when I got married, but because we eloped no one would have known if it was a religious ceremony or not. I havent actually had a situation that goes against the "expected" social grain such as not baptising a child.

eviltwin wrote: »

I didn't actually expect it to be a big deal, I don't take more than a passing interest in other people's beliefs but people, or at least some of the people I know , have this endless fascination with it.

Yeah I cant say Im all that interested in other peoples belief systems except to privately be a bit bemused that they seem otherwise rational. Although the older I get the more I see people just 'play the game' for the sake of schooling or a pretty church for wedding photographs. Each to their own and all that.

Bannasidhe

eviltwin wrote: »

I suppose its comes from the decision myself and my husband made not to bapthise our youngest child. Because the eldest was and because we come from Catholic families it was just assumed it would happen. When people asked us why we chose not to do it we told them the truth, we don't believe in god and that's when the comments started.

I didn't actually expect it to be a big deal, I don't take more than a passing interest in other people's beliefs but people, or at least some of the people I know , have this endless fascination with it.

I didn't get my fella baptised (it was the early 80s) and there were a few raised eyebrows - especially my Mother's - but I said I don't believe a word of it and it would be pure superstition and to appease other people.No gonna happen.
Mother accepted that - but probably would have put up more of a fight if I lived in Ireland at the time.

She did used to drag him to Mass when he would stay with her in the Summer for a holiday. He complained to me and I asked her to stop. She still had trouble getting her head around the fact that he wasn't (still isn't) a Catholic by even the lax Irish definition.

Now - they just reckon it's the way I am - in a *tut* 'you know what she's like' kinda way.

It did help when my 93 year old great-uncle announced he is an atheist and asked that I be put in charge of arranging his funeral so no blasted priests can stick their oar in.

Peregrinus

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Then why are these Evangelical Christians saying it is impossible? . . .

Can you provide me with examples of where it is possible to have one's name removed from the Baptismal Register?

Hi Bannasidhe

I think we need to distinguish between three different questions here.

Q. Is it possible, from a Catholic point of view, to “reverse” a baptism?

A. No.

From the Catholic perspective, the spiritual effects of baptism are irreversible, and you can no more be unbaptised than you can cease to be born or cease to have undergone puberty.

(It occurs to me, incidentally, that from a sceptical point of view it is equally impossible to reverse a baptism. If it has no spiritual effects, there are no spiritual effects to reverse.)

But this does not mean that a baptised person can’t leave the church. More on this below.

Q. It is possible, from a Catholic point of view, to have your name removed from the register of baptism?

Generally not. And it never was.

The “register of baptisms” is the sum total of all the church records of the baptisms that it has performed. Since the fact that a baptism has been performed is a matter of objective historical fact which will never change, it’s never appropriate to alter the register to suggest that a particular baptism did not, in fact, occur by deleting the record showing that it did. (By the same reasoning, the state does not delete your marriage record when you get divorced or have your marriage annulled by a court.)

What is possible is to have your baptismal record added to, to show relevant later events. This is routinely done, for example, if you marry in the Catholic church; if the system works properly, the church where you’re married notifies the church where you were baptised, and a notation is added to your baptismal record to show that you’re now married. And – see below – it possible at least in principle, and sometimes in practice, to have a baptismal record annotated to show that someone has left the church.

Q. Is it possible, from a Catholic point of view, for a baptised person to leave the Catholic church?

Yes. Despite the fact that baptism is seen as irreversible, a baptised person can freely leave the church.

This is because while baptism is necessary to be part of the church, it’s not in itself sufficient. (If it were, all those millions of baptised Anglicans and Lutherans and Calvinists and so forth would be counted as Catholics. And they’re not.)

You’re a Catholic if you’re a baptised Christian whose primary Eucharistic community is the Catholic church. You cease to be a Catholic when you terminate your relationship of communion with the Catholic church, and this is something you can do quite freely and completely unilaterally. It does not involve reversing the effects of baptism.

There was a period of some years when there was a canon law procedure in place for having your baptismal record annotated to show that you had left the church (and this, I suspect, is what you had done). From the Catholic point of view, this procedure actually had very limited relevance. If you had your defection noted in this way, then certain other rules of canon law (regarding where you could get married) no longer applied to you, meaning that you were free to marry – validly, in Catholic eyes – wherever you wanted, e.g. in a registry office. (The idea was to promote clarity and certainty regarding the effect of canon law on the validity of marriages.) But having your defection noted in this way was never a requirement for wider purposes. Your leaving the church was effective when you left, regardless of when, or indeed if, you ever had your baptismal record annotated.

This procedure was abandoned in 2009 for two reasons:

First, there was a growing notion that you had to go through this procedure in order to leave the church. This was not the case.

Secondly, and more seriously, the great majority of people who left the church did not bother to go through this procedure. This resulted in the anomaly that they were still regarded for canon law purposes as subject to Catholic canon law regarding where they could marry, even though they were not Catholic. The application of Catholic canon law to the validity of their marriages was clear, but completely wrong. Since this was not seen as a good outcome, the procedure was dropped.

The result is that, for all canonical purposes, the position is back to what it used to be; if you’ve left the church, you’re not Catholic. You’re not required to go through any particular procedure to leave the church; whether you have terminated your relationship of communion with the church is a matter of objective fact, not a question of whether you have gone through a particular form or process.

It’s up to each bishop/diocese to decide how – or indeed if – they want to document this. In general you’ll know whether you’ve left the church much better than they do, so they generally don’t want to be making – still less recording – a judgment about this unless, for their own purposes, they need to. And they very rarely do. Some dioceses do still operate a system of noting baptismal records if someone asks, but there is no longer a canon law requirement to offer this procedure and it has no canonical relevance or effect so, and most dioceses have stopped on the basis that continuing the practice creates the misleading impression that it’s a necessary requirement.

I know that a few diocese did continue, at least for a time, not least because of a post that I recall reading on Boards.ie from someone who had it done after the canon law rules changed (which happened in 2009, from memory). Sadly, my searching skills have failed to turn up the post concerned, so you can regard my evidence on this point as purely anecdotal.

Bannasidhe

Motopepe wrote: »

curious...how did you go about this and what obstacles did you encounter, if any?

Peregrinus wrote: »

Hi Bannasidhe

I think we need to distinguish between three different questions here.

Q. Is it possible, from a Catholic point of view, to “reverse” a baptism?

A. No.

From the Catholic perspective, the spiritual effects of baptism are irreversible, and you can no more be unbaptised than you can cease to be born or cease to have undergone puberty.

(It occurs to me, incidentally, that from a sceptical point of view it is equally impossible to reverse a baptism. If it has no spiritual effects, there are no spiritual effects to reverse.)

But this does not mean that a baptised person can’t leave the church. More on this below.

Q. It is possible, from a Catholic point of view, to have your name removed from the register of baptism?

Generally not. And it never was.

The “register of baptisms” is the sum total of all the church records of the baptisms that it has performed. Since the fact that a baptism has been performed is a matter of objective historical fact which will never change, it’s never appropriate to alter the register to suggest that a particular baptism did not, in fact, occur by deleting the record showing that it did. (By the same reasoning, the state does not delete your marriage record when you get divorced or have your marriage annulled by a court.)

What is possible is to have your baptismal record added to, to show relevant later events. This is routinely done, for example, if you marry in the Catholic church; if the system works properly, the church where you’re married notifies the church where you were baptised, and a notation is added to your baptismal record to show that you’re now married. And – see below – it possible at least in principle, and sometimes in practice, to have a baptismal record annotated to show that someone has left the church.

Q. Is it possible, from a Catholic point of view, for a baptised person to leave the Catholic church?

Yes. Despite the fact that baptism is seen as irreversible, a baptised person can freely leave the church.

This is because while baptism is necessary to be part of the church, it’s not in itself sufficient. (If it were, all those millions of baptised Anglicans and Lutherans and Calvinists and so forth would be counted as Catholics. And they’re not.)

You’re a Catholic if you’re a baptised Christian whose primary Eucharistic community is the Catholic church. You cease to be a Catholic when you terminate your relationship of communion with the Catholic church, and this is something you can do quite freely and completely unilaterally. It does not involve reversing the effects of baptism.

There was a period of some years when there was a canon law procedure in place for having your baptismal record annotated to show that you had left the church (and this, I suspect, is what you had done). From the Catholic point of view, this procedure actually had very limited relevance. If you had your defection noted in this way, then certain other rules of canon law (regarding where you could get married) no longer applied to you, meaning that you were free to marry – validly, in Catholic eyes – wherever you wanted, e.g. in a registry office. (The idea was to promote clarity and certainty regarding the effect of canon law on the validity of marriages.) But having your defection noted in this way was never a requirement for wider purposes. Your leaving the church was effective when you left, regardless of when, or indeed if, you ever had your baptismal record annotated.

This procedure was abandoned in 2009 for two reasons:

First, there was a growing notion that you had to go through this procedure in order to leave the church. This was not the case.

Secondly, and more seriously, the great majority of people who left the church did not bother to go through this procedure. This resulted in the anomaly that they were still regarded for canon law purposes as subject to Catholic canon law regarding where they could marry, even though they were not Catholic. The application of Catholic canon law to the validity of their marriages was clear, but completely wrong. Since this was not seen as a good outcome, the procedure was dropped.

The result is that, for all canonical purposes, the position is back to what it used to be; if you’ve left the church, you’re not Catholic. You’re not required to go through any particular procedure to leave the church; whether you have terminated your relationship of communion with the church is a matter of objective fact, not a question of whether you have gone through a particular form or process.

It’s up to each bishop/diocese to decide how – or indeed if – they want to document this. In general you’ll know whether you’ve left the church much better than they do, so they generally don’t want to be making – still less recording – a judgment about this unless, for their own purposes, they need to. And they very rarely do. Some dioceses do still operate a system of noting baptismal records if someone asks, but there is no longer a canon law requirement to offer this procedure and it has no canonical relevance or effect so, and most dioceses have stopped on the basis that continuing the practice creates the misleading impression that it’s a necessary requirement.

I know that a few diocese did continue, at least for a time, not least because of a post that I recall reading on Boards.ie from someone who had it done after the canon law rules changed (which happened in 2009, from memory). Sadly, my searching skills have failed to turn up the post concerned, so you can regard my evidence on this point as purely anecdotal.

Oh I am not disputing any of what you say for a second but Motopepe specifically asked about having name removed from the register and this, we both agree, seems, by all accounts, to not be possible anymore.

It used to be possible- I know because I had it done many years ago and have checked it did happen (Cork and Ross).

old hippy

I don't need some pony religion telling me who or what I am. So I removed myself from that religion. Didn't have to sign or process any paperwork or get the nod from a man in a cassock.

I just stopped believing.

Peregrinus

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Oh I am not disputing any of what you say for a second but Motopepe specifically asked about having name removed from the register and this, we both agree, seems, by all accounts, to not be possible anymore.

It used to be possible- I know because I had it done many years ago and have checked it did happen (Cork and Ross).

There's no longer a canonical requirement for dioceses to note defections on baptismal records, but some may still do so. We don't know whether the diocese in which Motopepe was baptised will do so; the only way for Motopepe to find out is to ask.

Bannasidhe

Peregrinus wrote: »

There's no longer a canonical requirement for dioceses to note defections on baptismal records, but some may still do so. We don't know whether the diocese in which Motopepe was baptised will do so; the only way for Motopepe to find out is to ask.

Which is why I said 'seems' to not be possible anymore.

Motopepe

I am more interested in the obstacles encountered by those seeking to have their name removed from baptismal records or having the records ammended to reflect their wish to do so.

Bannasidhe

Motopepe wrote: »

I am more interested in the obstacles encountered by those seeking to have their name removed from baptismal records or having the records ammended to reflect their wish to do so.

I had no problem so can't help you there but as I said, it was quite a few years ago.

ShooterSF

On facebook I'm quite the anti-theist in that I'll often share stories on my timeline that pop up in the hazards thread and bitch and moan about them. Luckily I also post up funny pics and comments separately so my friends put up with it

They only time in real life the issue of my beliefs come up with friends is when we attend a funeral or wedding as a group and someone always points out in faux shock that I haven't burst in to flames. But it's good natured ribbing.

Around my family I will tell them some of the crazier stories I read here and no one is really catholic bar maybe my lil sister but I'm gonna pretend it's a phase just to reverse the usual situation I read here!

The strangest thing is when I'm out with friends and they introduce me to new people or we introduce ourselves to new people (powered often by liquid courage) they often out of the blue, mid conversation, announce my atheism as a curiosity and often they end up discussing it with little input from me!

HelloGiggles

I'm Catholic, my boyfriend is an Atheist. It doesn't bother me in the slightest, why would it? Each to their own.

swampgas

HelloGiggles wrote: »

I'm Catholic, my boyfriend is an Atheist. It doesn't bother me in the slightest, why would it? Each to their own.

Are you the kind of Catholic who thinks atheists will burn forever in hell? That doesn't bother you? Maybe you're not as Catholic as you think

HelloGiggles

swampgas wrote: »

Maybe you're not as Catholic as you think

I don't regularly attend mass, if that's what you mean :P

It just doesn't bother me one way or another what people want to believe in or not believe for that matter.

People will always have something to say. Growing up, it was well known I came from a family who attended mass, I was called a nun and jeered for years. now, I don't mind a bit of slagging, sure we all get that, but It was ridiculous. So I really just leave people to do what they want and believe or not believe in what they want.

Can't change some folk:rolleyes:

swampgas

HelloGiggles wrote: »

I don't regularly attend mass, if that's what you mean :P

It just doesn't bother me one way or another what people want to believe in or not believe for that matter.

People will always have something to say. Growing up, it was well known I came from a family who attended mass, I was called a nun and jeered for years. now, I don't mind a bit of slagging, sure we all get that, but It was ridiculous. So I really just leave people to do what they want and believe or not believe in what they want.

Can't change some folk:rolleyes:

Sure - I absolutely agree that people should be free to believe what they want, but I'm just suggesting that maybe you aren't really a "Catholic" in the same way the pope might be :pac:

The reason I mention it is that maybe you would tick "Catholic" on the census, when in fact your true values and beliefs might be somewhat different...