Flourish

Geomy

Does organised religion or reddit style atheism allow you to flourish as a human being ?

I think it can be dangerous to allow yourself to be a sheep to follow or agree with reddit atheism and atheism plus etc or the likes of the West Boro Christian church types.

Benny_Cake

Geomy wrote: »

Does organised religion or reddit style atheism allow you to flourish as a human being ?

I think it can be dangerous to allow yourself to be a sheep to follow or agree with reddit atheism and atheism plus etc or the likes of the West Boro Christian church types.

Well, I can't speak for Atheism plus or "reddit-style" atheism (I do like the "Ask Me Anything" topics on Reddit though, I've learnt a lot from them).

I'm really only beginning to explore a return to a form of organised religion now after many years as a non-practicing ultra-lapsed Catholic. I tried to maintain my Christian spiritual life by just doing my own thing but I've come to realise that being part of a community really does help...it can be difficult on your own. My spiritual life, such that it is, is a source of joy to me. I think it helps me find meaning in life, hold myself to account, and be a better support to those I care about. So yeah, I find my faith has helped me greatly. I've a long way to go, the Gospel message is one which I expect to be challenged by for the rest of my life but that's all part of my life's adventure!

Plenty of abusive churches/religious groups out there, many which are not half as well known as the Westboro Baptist Church (which is basically just the Phelps family). In general, if an group is authoritarian, or they say that they and they alone have it all figured out, I'd run a mile. Same goes for those who try to break up families, or which are all about the money.

Doctor DooM

Just to point out, the vast majority of atheists deride A+ et al. too.

I think on both sides of the "border" most right thinking people would be happy if you thought about your position and came to it through a bit of soul searching (ahem) and logic.

This doesn't mean you can't meet a group and find similar friends and get support.

Sacksian

Geomy wrote: »

Does organised religion or reddit style atheism allow you to flourish as a human being ?

I think it can be dangerous to allow yourself to be a sheep to follow or agree with reddit atheism and atheism plus etc or the likes of the West Boro Christian church types.

I think the word "sheep" has to be used appropriately - atheists make up a very small proportion of the country. Particularly given some of the social issues arising from the nature of the Church-state relationship in the 20th century, Ireland could have used fewer sheep in the past.

Many people were actively restrained from flourishing as human beings due to the overwhelming dominance of a single belief system within society as a whole.

For that reason, I think it's more important that there is more diversity of belief within a culture and society as a whole, so that individual beliefs have less influence, generally.

Banbh

Would Christians be better off if they gave up trying to influence and control the State, schools, hospitals etc and joined together to show by example the basic Christian values of concern for others etc.

I have often wondered that there hasn't been a backlash against the strident voices who claim to speak on behalf of Christianity and who are only concerned with making society corform - by laws and regulations - to their viewpoint.

Surely a more loving, forgiving, more charitable approach would be more inspiring to non-believers.

homer911

I dont believe Christians should hide behind the law. Neither do I believe that Christians should sit idly by and do nothing to influence laws that affect them

Sandals and Shorts

Banbh wrote: »

Would extremist Christians/Atheists be better off if they gave up trying to influence and control the State, schools, hospitals etc and joined together to show by example the basic Christian/Humanist values of concern for others etc.

I have often wondered that there hasn't been a backlash against the extremist voices who claim to portray all Christians/Atheists in the same way, and who are only concerned with making society conform - by laws and regulations - to their viewpoint.

Surely a more loving, forgiving, more charitable approach by extreme Christians and Atheists would be more inspiring to believers and non-believers alike.

FYP

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLNhPMQnWu4

Banbh

The question I'm trying to address (not too well, I admit) is: would Christianity be better served if Christians did not demand that the laws of the land enforced their views? I am thinking of oaths for judges, politicians etc and the control of the education system.
Islam is equally trying to get its viewpoint established as the state religion, which is why it is rightly feared. Christianity is coming from a position where it was the state religion.
Why are there no Christians who merely want to practise their faith and show by example a more 'christian' way of living?

Benny_Cake

Banbh wrote: »

The question I'm trying to address (not too well, I admit) is: would Christianity be better served if Christians did not demand that the laws of the land enforced their views? I am thinking of oaths for judges, politicians etc and the control of the education system.
Islam is equally trying to get its viewpoint established as the state religion, which is why it is rightly feared. Christianity is coming from a position where it was the state religion.
Why are there no Christians who merely want to practise their faith and show by example a more 'christian' way of living?

I think that there are many Christians who want to do just that. That doesn't disqualify them from taking a particular viewpoint on certain issues however and lobbying their politicians to ensure that their point of view is represented. That's simply what any citizen is entitled to do. What I would say though is that when attempting to justify legislation, it should be possible to make the same argument from a secular viewpoint too. For example, a campaign for a constitutional change requiring church attendance on a Sunday would rightly be greeted with derision. On the other hand, campaign to get the government to take action to end child poverty is perfectly justifiable from both a Christian and non-Christian/non-religious point of view.

With regard to oaths, personally I think they can't be justified from any standpoint, and I would hope that wherever an oath is currently required that the option of making an affirmation would also be provided (I wouldn't swear an oath personally, and that's not just because of my recently discovered Quaker leanings!). On education, I think the state should attempt to meet the needs of all parents insofar as it's possible. I'd have no problem with helping out a campaign for an educate together school, and if I ever had children I'd like to send them to one.

Anyway, to bring it back to the OP's post, I would take flourish to mean "love God, love neighbour". I don't always manage to follow these simple commands, but with regard to the second, it doesn't matter to me what religion my neighbour is, I'm still called to love them. I'm not loving them if I'm trying to impose a belief system on them. I'd contend that the majority of Christians in this country don't wish to do that.

Banbh

Thank you for that BC. I'm heartened by your views. I must say I have never come across them from others in the public arena.
It would be wonderful if Christians and others could combine to propose a school system that is open to all beliefs and a Constitution that is neutral on religious belief.
Apart from your post - and a Christian friend I had (now deceased) I have never seen anything but a determination to hold on to every privilege from the representatives of Christianity.

Sandals and Shorts

I think the problem is that opponents of Christianity concentrate on the Fred Phelps of this world, a tiny proportion of Christians, and extrapolate that as an example of all Christian views. They highlight only the negative and ignore, or at best downplay all the positive things done by Christians who far outnumber the Phelps family. They also take an example like abortion and pretend anyone who objects to abortion must a Fred Phelps style person and is trying to impose their views on others. This is not the case, e.g. I would be opposed to abortion whether I was a theist or not, because I also believe an unborn child has an equal right to life. I'm not loving my neighbour (an unborn child is also my neighbor) if I don't stand up for their equal right to life. In a similar way Catholicism (and all Christianity untill the 1930's) will say it objects to contraception because it ultimately prevents human life and they don't believe we have the right to prevent other human life. So the whole situation is not cut and dried. However, it's often mis-portrayed as "telling others what to do".

Sandals and Shorts

Banbh wrote: »

I have never seen anything but a determination to hold on to every privilege from the representatives of Christianity.

Can you list out what you perceive those privileges to be ?

Banbh

I was thinking of the control of the schools, the swearing of oaths for politicians, judges etc, the special position afforded to priests and religious, the dedication of the country and its laws under the Constitution and the thousand other slights that many Christians are unaware of.
Perhaps if you consider what it would be like if these were replaced by [something you don't accept], you might see it as others see it.
But I am still trying to understand why Christians would want these things. If I were a devout Christian, I would regard these privileges as detrimental to the message I was trying to get across to others. Maybe Christians in Ireland today, no longer think it is necessary to convince others as they have authority on their side.
Ireland is changing. It is becoming more secular. What form that secularism takes will be influenced by the attitude of Christians today. Will it be tolerant and inclusive or authoritarian and unforgiving?

Sandals and Shorts

Banbh wrote: »

I was thinking of the control of the schools

Christians only control their own Catholic and Protestant schools. There are not enough non Christian schools, the state has rightly committed to providing more non Christian schools. A word of advice though, I would not let the Irish state educate your cat, never mind your child. Almost 200 children have died in state care from 2000-2010. I would advise non Christian parents to go the route of educate together etc. i.e. set up and administer your own schools and obtain the state funding you're also entitled to. Don't hand over complete control of your children's education to the state, if you value their education at all.

Banbh wrote: »

, the swearing of oaths for politicians, judges etc,

Irish Politicians love to lie in public that's what they do best. The oath used to fool the Irish public in years gone by. I don't think Irish politicians and their cronie appointments fool anyone now. As a Christian I would like to see the corrupt Irish politicians ability to swear to God removed.

As Jesus said : "In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus explained the second commandment: "You have heard that it was said to the men of old, 'You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.' But I say to you, Do not swear at all. . . . Let what you say be simply 'Yes' or 'No'; anything more than this comes from the evil one."

Banbh wrote: »

the special position afforded to priests and religious

I don't know what you perceive this to be, you'll have to elaborate.

Banbh wrote: »

, the dedication of the country and its laws under the Constitution

Personally, I'd like to see all references to God removed from the state constitution ( I presume this is what you are referring to.), because the state does not know the true God, and has no business pretending it does. I don't believe the Irish state or Irish politicians are in any way worthy of using God's name for anything. Christ did not come to reform the Roman authorities or other corrupt states, he came to reform Jews and Gentile alike into becoming Christians. He had no interest in the state.

Banbh wrote: »

and the thousand other slights that many Christians AND Atheists are unaware of.
Perhaps if Christians AND Atheists consider what it would be like if these were replaced by [something they don't accept], you might see it as others see it.

FYP

Banbh wrote: »

Ireland is changing. It is becoming more secular. What form that secularism takes will be influenced by the attitude of Christians today. Will it be tolerant and inclusive or authoritarian and unforgiving?

A TRULY secular state does not display a preference to Theism or Atheism, or endorse one over the other.

The alternative to true secularism is state atheism, which is often disguised as 'secularism'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism

Banbh

Well you are quite content with your control of the education system and of the schools. I hope you will be equally content when your privileged position is reversed.

Benny_Cake

Mod note: Probably best to continue discussion of the education system on a separate thread as it's not really on topic here.

Sandals and Shorts

Banbh wrote: »

Well you are quite content with your control of the education system and of the schools. I hope you will be equally content when your privileged position is reversed.

" Control . . .privilege . . . position . . .content . . . reverse" . . . ah I see now

I don't have control of anything other than myself, and any perceived privilege is in your head.
I currently have freedom of religion, but I'll go back to the mass rock when the time comes. It won't bother me.

And you started out civil.

As the mod says . . moving forward . . .

Banbh

Sorry but I thought the thread was discontinued, and i am still being civil.
You dismissed my concerns about schooling with, in my humble opinion, a rather contemptuous 'go and educate your kids with Educate Together' when of course that is not an option.
I live in rural Ireland and my school (the one designated by the Dept of Ed and the only one within an 10 miles) is run by the Catholic Church though paid for by the citizens.
But to return to my original, and civil point: why do Christians want the backing of the State for their views and not rely on their own good example to further their message?
I fear I have still not found the Christian that will follow the teaching of their founder in this regard.

Sandals and Shorts

Take the schools issue to the correct thread so I can reply.

What backing of the state are you talking about ?

I want very little to do with the state and I want them to have even less to do with my beliefs, see my replies earlier.

If I'm voting for something or someone, just like everyone else, I'll vote for what aligns with my own beliefs. That's democracy.

Atheist Ireland lobby the government day in day out, so what's the issue ?