Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Exactly what percentage of the population is "christian"?

1…1718202223…70

Comments

  • #572
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Are you paid per hyperbole?

    It would be more like 96% of the population being educated in schools 'owned' by the Republican Party with a Republican ethos and the head of the household votes on behalf of everyone in the house.
    Let's assume your massive conspiracy theory of a nationwide mind-control programme of our entire nation's children. How did you escape their sinister clutches?


  • #573
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,179 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Y'know what it's like? Hardcore tea-partiers saying Obama isn't the legitimate President AFTER the election.

    Their argument:
    1. A poll of 1,000 people which showed Romney leading.
    2. They know 7 people who voted for Romney and only 3 who voted for Obama.
    3. A poll showing +50% of people opposing abortion - It's somehow impossible to be a Democrat and oppose abortion.
    4. Other people are too thick to understand who they actually should have voted for. If they weren't so thick they would realise they are actually Republican. Their votes should be transferred to Romney.
    5. Democratic brainwashing makes people vote Democrat even when they don't want to.
    6. Voting is just "ticking a box".
    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Are you paid per hyperbole?
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Let's assume your massive conspiracy theory of a nationwide mind-control programme of our entire nation's children. How did you escape their sinister clutches?


    :D:D

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #574
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Let's assume your massive conspiracy theory of a nationwide mind-control programme of our entire nation's children. How did you escape their sinister clutches?

    What conspiracy theory would that be exactly?

    It is a proven fact that 96% of State funded Irish schools have a Catholic ethos which means that in 96% of State funded schools the pupils are exposed to RCC doctrine and these schools are legally allowed to discriminate when it comes to employment practices.



    The only way to assure a completely secular education in Ireland is to attend a private school that receives no funding from the State.

    Like I did. :p


  • #575
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    1. Belief and ritual are one and the same when the belief includes the belief that the ritual is obligatory.
    How many times do you expect me to tell you this? Belief and ritual are different. A belief in a ritual is still a belief.
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    2. The cathechism is a summary of catholic doctrine, much more akin to constitution than guide.
    Having to repeat myself again. The Cathecism is a set of instructions on how to be a "good" Catholic. At no point does it state that failure to comply (sin) means that you cannot consider yourself Catholic anymore.

    Feel free to correct me with references if you want but I won't be repeating myself again.

    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    3. You are the only one moving the goalposts. You first claimed that dictionaries define christmas as a christian festival (hence Higgins should have referenced christianity in his speech). However I proved that it is also defined as secular, so his not referencing it is actually a non-point. Tell me, if you have always accepted that christmas is both christian and secular festival (as many dictionaries define it), then what was your initial disagreement about?
    If you reread the words that I actually said you will understand that I said "Every dictionary will define Christmass being a Christian Festival celebrating the birth of Christ".
    Feel free to share a dictionary that doesn't. Otherwise, I won't be repeating myself.
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    4. No they don't, because as we both know, your original point was that christmas is only a christian festival.
    See where making assumptions gets you? Of course its not only a Christian Festival.


  • #576
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    J
    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    What conspiracy theory would that be exactly?

    It is a proven fact that 96% of State funded Irish schools have a Catholic ethos which means that in 96% of State funded schools the pupils are exposed to RCC doctrine and these schools are legally allowed to discriminate when it comes to employment practices.



    The only way to assure a completely secular education in Ireland is to attend a private school that receives no funding from the State.

    Like I did. :p


    That explains it. Just to be clear I am very much for secular education, it's just that I don't see the connection between a religious education which hypnotises adults into answering one way or the other in a census.


  • Advertisement
  • #577
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    J


    That explains it. Just to be clear I am very much for secular education, it's just that I don't see the connection between a religious education which hypnotises adults into answering one way or the other in a census.

    If, by now, you cannot see how being exposed on a regular basis to a religious ethos which is interwoven with ones very education in a setting where respect and obedience for authority are enforced may 'hypnotise' people into unquestioning identification with that ethos even when ones personnel beliefs are at odds with it then it will take more patience then I possess to explain it to you.


  • #578
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    weisses wrote: »
    Don't know ... you tell me

    Had one simple question regarding the OP and the dismissal of the census figures.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88382024&postcount=351

    13 pages of mostly OT, opinionated discussion further and still not a remotely reliable answer

    So i think the answer to your question would be NO

    The whole thread is dealing with your question, use one of the many (a few of which we've pointed out), like for example the Irish Times poll of 2012 detailing that 20% of catholics don't even believe Jebus rose from the dead, which are much more detailed, in depth and better than the census.

    We've discussed the issue, detailed the problems and offered solutions. All you've done is stick your fingers in your ears and repeated your mantra; "na, na, na, I am not listening" ad infinitum, ad nauseum.


  • #579
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Weisses, this is what apparently blows the census out of the water biggrin.png
    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    Well your answer is clearly false, as proper surveys which investigate Irish religiosity shows that the actual % of atheists in this country is at 10%.
    Proper survey? The census is the single most comprehensive survey on Irish relgiousity.
    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    Given the number of people who are religious but not christian in this country that means the 90% is false,
    What specifically is this number?

    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    before we even look at how much the soi-disant christians actually believe. Well a poll from last year has shown that 7% of catholics don't believe that there is a god, and 20% don't believe jebus rose from the dead, giving a further 16.8% reduction of christians from the figure as professed in the census.
    That is not a link to any poll. It is a link to a crappy, tabloid style website.
    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    Thus we're now down 63.2% of the population are christian, before we bring up the big problem with these kinds of questions in a census, fraud.
    63.2%? pacman.gif
    What was the sample size? 1000 people? Let's be really generous and say 20% of "Catholics" polled don't believe in God. That is 200 people.
    What is 4 million-plus people minus 200 people? It's still 4 million.

    You really arent' thinking this through...

    Of these supposed 200 people, how many answered Catholic in the 2011 census? Were they all even alive? How do you know these 200 didn't answer "lapsed Catholic", "no religion", "atheist" or simply not answer the question?

    You don't do you? You are guessing. How do you know that didn't regain their faith or become Mormon. Muslim, Jewish etc? You don't. You are guessing.

    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    Because, you see, most people don't fill out for themselves in the census, it is filled out by the householder, so if mammy has a 20 year old Johnny going to college and she knows he's atheist and she's religious she's likely going to lie on the census and put him down as the same religion as herself.
    I suppose you can provide some scientific evidence for this claim? Exactly what is the number of occasions this has happened?
    Does this happen proportionally more frequently in Christian households? Please provide references.
    No guessing, remember!

    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    And then you've the problem of parents with young children, at any age under five (at least) the only correct answer for your child is "no religion" because no child at that age can grasp the complex ideas of religion (Santa's as close as they come) so given the the age profile of the country we are probably looking at the bulk of the youngest 5% of the country being mislabled, plus a good portion of quite a few of the rest.
    It's a problem in your opinion. Our state and states the world over are happy for parents to raise their own children as they see best, which includes religion.

    What gives you the right to tell the parents of a child you have never met what they should be recording in the census for their own families?

    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    So the figures in the census are for definite very fishy (i.e. at lest 20% of an overcount), and there is a reasonable ground to suspect that if it were more accurately done, the figure would truly be under 50%.

    And all that done with no second guessing required, at all. Just some ability to read statistics.
    The whole thing was guess.


  • #580
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Brown Bomber wrote: »

    63.2%? pacman.gif
    What was the sample size? 1000 people? Let's be really generous and say 20% of "Catholics" polled don't believe in God. That is 200 people.
    What is 4 million-plus people minus 200 people? It's still 4 million.

    You really arent' thinking this through...

    Actually you aren't.

    Common misconception : An opinion poll can't accurately reflect a population.
    Done correctly they can. It doesn't matter if you poll 1,000 people or all one million people. Generally speaking your results will be statistically valid. All that matters is your sampling. If your reputation with consumers is determined by accurate surveys then you're this is likely one area where you're not going to make crappy selection.

    Second misconception : People here are disputing the fact that people self identify as Catholic.
    They aren't disputing that all. They are disputing whether this self identification is accurately reflecting attitudes in the population as a whole.
    A similar thing applies to asking people opinions on many political issues. They self identify as belonging to one group but may actually hold opinions in opposition to that identity.


  • #581
    Days 298
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭Days 298


    Religious zealots wear blinkers.


  • Advertisement
  • #582
    weisses
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,823 ✭✭✭weisses


    Jernal wrote: »
    Actually you aren't.

    Common misconception : An opinion poll can't accurately reflect a population.
    Done correctly they can. It doesn't matter if you poll 1,000 people or all one million people. Generally speaking your results will be statistically valid. All that matters is your sampling. If your reputation with consumers is determined by accurate surveys then you're this is likely one area where you're not going to make crappy selection.

    Second misconception : People here are disputing the fact that people self identify as Catholic.
    They aren't disputing that all. They are disputing whether this self identification is accurately reflecting attitudes in the population as a whole.
    A similar thing applies to asking people opinions on many political issues. They self identify as belonging to one group but may actually hold opinions in opposition to that identity.

    Just to add a third misconception

    An opinion poll in the irish times is not more accurate then the combined statistical results from about 20 nationwide survey's over the past century


  • #583
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    weisses wrote: »
    Just to add a third misconception

    An opinion poll in the irish times is not more accurate then the combined statistical results from about 20 nationwide survey's over the past century

    Don't see that misconception in this thread. All I see is one group missing the reason why the comparison to other surveys is being made.

    So then the only way to clear the air is to have the next census ask the questions that were asking in those polls. Until that time both parties here are talking apples and oranges.


  • #584
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Assuming that everyone enters correct information, ie no mothers saying you are a catholic that can speak irish as my mother was going to, the census shows that about 90% of the population sees themselves as catholic. Is this an issue on its own? No, they can make themselves the head of their own religion if they feel like it. The issue is when this 90% number is used as a justification for other issues.

    Surveys have shown that most people are ok with abortion when needed and dont think homosexuality should be criminalised. Two things that go against what the church claims. People using the 90% as a way of saying "90% of the country is catholic, so 90% of the schools should have a catholic ethos" but will complain if their child is being told that Jimmy's fathers are going to hell because they are evil and nobody should play with jimmy or he will spread the gay. They would also be against a ban on working on Sundays. Despite claiming being a part of a religion they dont agree with many views of the religion. Its make the 90% of the population is Christian argument useless.


  • #585
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Jernal wrote: »
    Actually you aren't.

    Common misconception : An opinion poll can't accurately reflect a population.
    Done correctly they can. It doesn't matter if you poll 1,000 people or all one million people. Generally speaking your results will be statistically valid. All that matters is your sampling. If your reputation with consumers is determined by accurate surveys then you're this is likely one area where you're not going to make crappy selection.

    Second misconception : People here are disputing the fact that people self identify as Catholic.
    They aren't disputing that all. They are disputing whether this self identification is accurately reflecting attitudes in the population as a whole.
    A similar thing applies to asking people opinions on many political issues. They self identify as belonging to one group but may actually hold opinions in opposition to that identity.

    Every obscure poll dug up is by definition is an estimate. The census by definition is not an estimate. I am blue in the face pointing out the obvious which is that a survey which is an inference cannot contradict a survey which is exact, in theory.

    This exactness depends on the public's co-operation. The state does all that they can reasonably do to get as accurate information as possible. We are legally obliged to respond and there are large fines for anyone found to be giving misleading or false information. They also make ir accessible to all - blind, deaf, illiterate, non-English speakers and so on. It's a best-effort, that works on the assumption that we will fill it in accurately. Working on the assumption of the guilty until proven innocent network of Irish Catttholic housewives uniquely committing widescale fraud is absurd.

    I am aware it is flawed, but it is the best count of religious affiliations in our country that we have.


  • #586
    weisses
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,823 ✭✭✭weisses


    Jernal wrote: »
    Don't see that misconception in this thread. All I see is one group missing the reason why the comparison to other surveys is being made.

    So then the only way to clear the air is to have the next census ask the questions that were asking in those polls. Until that time both parties here are talking apples and oranges.


    Or the polls need to ask questions as in the census ... would be way easier, but you are right, A random poll in a newspaper is not the same as a nationwide census


  • #587
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Every obscure poll dug up is by definition is an estimate. The census by definition is not an estimate. I am blue in the face pointing out the obvious which is that a survey which is an inference cannot contradict a survey which is exact, in theory.

    This exactness depends on the public's co-operation. The state does all that they can reasonably do to get as accurate information as possible. We are legally obliged to respond and there are large fines for anyone found to be giving misleading or false information. They also make ir accessible to all - blind, deaf, illiterate, non-English speakers and so on. It's a best-effort, that works on the assumption that we will fill it in accurately. Working on the assumption of the guilty until proven innocent network of Irish Catttholic housewives uniquely committing widescale fraud is absurd.

    I am aware it is flawed, but it is the best count of religious affiliations in our country that we have.

    Do you accept that people do not always self identify with the group that actually holds opinions representative of their own?


  • #588
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    weisses wrote: »
    Or the polls need to ask questions as in the census ... would be way easier, but you are right, A random poll in a newspaper is not the same as a nationwide census

    Census only asks people to self identify. Polls in the newspaper have asked people to self identify and then they've been asked questions on their understandings of their identity. So, by that it would seem that the random newspaper poll is more accurately grabbing a picture of society.


  • #589
    weisses
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,823 ✭✭✭weisses


    Jernal wrote: »
    Census only asks people to self identify. Polls in the newspaper have asked people to self identify and then they've been asked questions on their understandings of their identity. So, by that it would seem that the random newspaper poll is more accurately grabbing a picture of society.

    Fine

    Where do you get the impression that what you are saying above regarding polls is used in below example ?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland#Public_opinion

    original post

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88415437&postcount=560


  • #590
    alaimacerc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    Jernal wrote: »
    Republic of Ireland,
    British Isles

    That always goes down well!

    Don't you mean "These Islands"? Or "The Islands With No Name"? Or "The European Archipelago"? Or (the one I half-seriously hope might eventually catch one "The Brirish Isles"?


  • #591
    alaimacerc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    weisses wrote: »
    All you are doing is dodging a simple question.
    No, I'm just declining to play the game of endlessly reposting references to detailed opinion surveys that you'll either simply ignore outright, and continue with this mendacious "no-one has posted anything!" nonsense, or you'll say "by definition, it's a survey, therefore not as good as the means-what-I-want-it-to-mean census, therefore I'll ignore it entirely".
    Again ( I almost feel like debating with a religious fanatic about religion) If you don't agree with the bloody census then provide some valid numbers that support your opinion.
    And by "valid", you're only prepared to accept "the census". Nice catch., that Catch-22, I imagine you must be thinking, but frankly, it's amateur hour Jesuit tribute band stuff, it really is. And you think you can fly the "talking point" that I'm the fanatic, when you're the person rejecting all surveys inconsistent with your over-reading of the census results out of hand?
    You believe the census is wrong, that's a wrong stance to take when talking facts
    Telling people what they believe is a guaranteed way to get someone's back up, especially if you're going to throw a blatant misrepresentation in their face. I know what I believe, and what I've said, and don't you dare to tell me different, "matey".


  • Advertisement
  • #592
    alaimacerc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Every obscure poll dug up is by definition is an estimate. The census by definition is not an estimate. I am blue in the face pointing out the obvious which is that a survey which is an inference cannot contradict a survey which is exact, in theory.
    And we're red in the ears listening to this same old denialist rubbish. Let me try to take you through this once more, as slowly as I can:
    1. Person tells the census that they're "Catholic".
    2. Same person tells a survey conducted by the bishop's conference they don't believe in god. (Among various other things I'll spare you, in the interests of getting a straight answer to this one point you've dodged every time to this point.) We have direct evidence this has happened.

    Are you telling me that the answer given in the second case is "inaccurate"? Because it's not a census question, therefore it doesn't count? Or are you merely so deliberately ignorant of basic statistics that you feel that no conclusions whatsoever can be drawn from this, beyond this person's own "discrepancy" between "affiliation" on whatever basis, and their actual belief? To be dismissed as "just one person" as you have the assorted anecdotes here of outright "responsible person" misrepresentation?
    I am aware it is flawed, but it is the best count of religious affiliations in our country that we have.

    Your use once again of the weaselly "affiliation" is noted. Are we slowly getting you to acknowledge by inches that ticking the box marked "Catholic" implies essentially nothing about actual practice, or indeed actual belief?


  • #593
    Piliger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    Since when does the catholic hierarchy decide if someone is a catholic or not ? They don't make the rules. Most catholics identify based on far older and more biblically based criteria...


  • #594
    MrPudding
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,779 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    Piliger wrote: »
    Since when does the catholic hierarchy decide if someone is a catholic or not ? They don't make the rules. Most catholics identify based on far older and more biblically based criteria...

    Are you drunk? Of course they make the bloody rules. Seriously.

    MrP


  • #595
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    :confused:
    Piliger wrote: »
    Since when does the catholic hierarchy decide if someone is a catholic or not ? They don't make the rules. Most catholics identify based on far older and more biblically based criteria...


    Being a family blessed/cursed with a tendency towards longevity we have a fair few older Catholics knocking around. Not one of them has ever read a Bible. Ever. I asked.*
    They all look to the Vatican.



    *I really did - I was trying to see how many of them held beliefs that were a tad more...Protestant... than Catholic.


  • #596
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    Piliger wrote: »
    Since when does the catholic hierarchy decide if someone is a catholic or not ? They don't make the rules. Most catholics identify based on far older and more biblically based criteria...

    Since about 350 A.D.

    The catholic church has the same power to declare what constitute the criteria to be a catholic as the Irish state has to declare the criteria for Irish citizenship. They feckin' own the club after all.


  • #597
    weisses
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,823 ✭✭✭weisses


    alaimacerc wrote: »
    No, I'm just declining to play the game of endlessly reposting references to detailed opinion surveys that you'll either simply ignore outright, and continue with this mendacious "no-one has posted anything!" nonsense, or you'll say "by definition, it's a survey, therefore not as good as the means-what-I-want-it-to-mean census, therefore I'll ignore it entirely".

    You didn't post references to detailed opinion surveys ...

    I quoted from one Robindch posted that stated 90 % of the people considered them self catholic ... Not helping much

    The only game being played is the game of dodging simple questions, but don't let facts get in your way .... feel free to post whatever makes you feel good at the end of the day


  • #598
    weisses
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,823 ✭✭✭weisses


    alaimacerc wrote: »
    And by "valid", you're only prepared to accept "the census". Nice catch., that Catch-22, I imagine you must be thinking, but frankly, it's amateur hour Jesuit tribute band stuff, it really is.


    Please stop crying foul,

    You couldn't possible know what i accept, for that you actually need to present something.


  • #599
    weisses
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,823 ✭✭✭weisses


    alaimacerc wrote: »
    And we're red in the ears listening to this same old denialist rubbish. Let me try to take you through this once more, as slowly as I can:
    1. Person tells the census that they're "Catholic".
    2. Same person tells a survey conducted by the bishop's conference they don't believe in god. (Among various other things I'll spare you, in the interests of getting a straight answer to this one point you've dodged every time to this point.) We have direct evidence this has happened.

    I will take this slowly back to you .... tell me when I'm going to fast!!

    Where did you get the information it went as you described above ?


    I heard someone filled in "no religion" and yet there were 3 more people in the household who where religious.


  • #600
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    weisses wrote: »
    You need to do a lot better in proving a poll done on 1000 people is more accurate then a survey covering the whole population

    Again, the issue isnt accuracy, it's relevancy. The census only asks what religion people self-identify as, it doesn't measure what religion people actually follow.

    BTW, what happened to the rest of my post? You seemed happy enough to discuss my points when you thought you could counter them, why are you running away now?


  • Advertisement
  • #601
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    How many times do you expect me to tell you this? Belief and ritual are different. A belief in a ritual is still a belief.

    Exactly, a belief in a ritual is a belief, so you cannot separate them. Catholic doctrine says that catholics have to follow certain rituals. Those who do not follow them because they don't believe the have to, are therefore not catholics. They don't follow the ritual or the belief.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Having to repeat myself again. The Cathecism is a set of instructions on how to be a "good" Catholic. At no point does it state that failure to comply (sin) means that you cannot consider yourself Catholic anymore.

    Feel free to correct me with references if you want but I won't be repeating myself again.

    I dont need any references, your argument falls apart under its own inanity. Lets say that the doctrine is just a guide and it doesn't actually matter if someone follows any of it. Does it matter if anyone follows any of it? Can we not just declare all as catholics regardless of what they say or do? Bless the rain clouds and baptise everyone and then everyone is catholic regardless of what they actually believe or do (its not like catholics wait for the babies permission to baptise them after all). You would save everyone from eternal hell.
    At what point does a persons complete contempt and disdain for catholic doctrine actually stop them from being a catholic BB?
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    If you reread the words that I actually said you will understand that I said "Every dictionary will define Christmass being a Christian Festival celebrating the birth of Christ".
    Feel free to share a dictionary that doesn't. Otherwise, I won't be repeating myself.

    Except I gave several that dictionaries that describe it also a secular festival. If you were genuinely saying that christmas is also a christian festival, then that would be a strawman, as nobody said it was just a secular festival.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    See where making assumptions gets you? Of course its not only a Christian Festival.

    I have to ask again, BB, because you have ignored it here:
    Tell me, if you have always accepted that christmas is both christian and secular festival (as many dictionaries define it), then what was your initial disagreement about?
    Why should the secular president of the entire population of the Republic of Ireland reference anything more than the secular aspects of christmas?


Advertisement