Exactly what percentage of the population is "christian"?

catallus · 16-01-2014 04:40PM

Without getting too personal, and you can obviously tell me to mindmyownbusiness, where are you going to be buried? or are you being burned? or what?

swampgas · 16-01-2014 04:42PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Again, bringing it back to the census, John is free to self identify himself as he pleases. He's free to scribble in "Jedi Knight" if he wants.

Sure, anyone can write anything they like, but aren't Catholics (or Christians generally) supposed to be honest? Or is honesty optional for Catholics too? (Mind you it's been optional for the hierarchy for years, what with "mental reservation" and all that.)

Nevertheless, surely a Christian lying about their Christianity is somewhat ironic?

Bannasidhe · 16-01-2014 04:43PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

We should if parents want them. Yes.

Hmmm... so parents get to tell children what religion they are and the State should pay for this?

Does this mean when you said

I don't believe, however, that we should tell other people what religion they are.

What you meant was

I don't believe, however, that we should tell other people what religion they are unless they are our children

What about parents who don't want their children to be raised in any religion? Do they get a choice too?

Delirium · 16-01-2014 04:44PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

We should if parents want them. Yes.

I call principal of the Jedi National School!

Bannasidhe · 16-01-2014 04:46PM

catallus wrote: »

Without getting too personal, and you can obviously tell me to mindmyownbusiness, where are you going to be buried? or are you being burned? or what?

Apart from not burned - I imagine in a hole in the ground somewhere. As I will be dead I'm not that fussed but there are H&S rules about that sort of thing so I suppose the hole in question will be in one of the many, many, many graves members of my family own in various County Council cemeteries.

Brother owns one with a lovely view in Kinsale

.

I Heart Internet · 16-01-2014 04:48PM

swampgas wrote: »

Sure, anyone can write anything they like, but aren't Catholics (or Christians generally) supposed to be honest? Or is honesty optional for Catholics too? (Mind you it's been optional for the hierarchy for years, what with "mental reservation" and all that.)

Nevertheless, surely a Christian lying about their Christianity is somewhat ironic?

I'm not suggesting anyone lie about their beliefs. But as long as they are happy with their answer (even if we think they are deluding themselves) that's fine.

catallus · 16-01-2014 04:51PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

I'm not suggesting anyone lie about their beliefs. But as long as they are happy with their answer (even if we think they are deluding themselves) that's fine.

Nobody has to lie about their beliefs. Anyway as long as most teachers uphold their faith while teaching their students I'm sure the whole thing will pan out ok, in spite of the pagan machinations of those who would see the state in full control.

I Heart Internet · 16-01-2014 04:52PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Hmmm... so parents get to tell children what religion they are and the State should pay for this?

Yes.

Does this mean when you said

Quote:
I don't believe, however, that we should tell other people what religion they are.
What you meant was

Quote:
I don't believe, however, that we should tell other people what religion they are unless they are our children

Yes. Absolutely. That's what I meant. I didn't mention children in my previous post.

I beleive that parents have the right and responsibility to raise children with religious belief's they deem appropriate.

16-01-2014 04:53PM

I just saw that someone is trying to get some funding for a short documentary about a priest who invited two "members of the LGBT community" to address a Novena in Dundalk last year. Once again I wonder why that priest is still a priest and why anyone in the Church who didn't protest about it considers themselves Catholic.

Delirium · 16-01-2014 04:53PM

catallus wrote: »

Nobody has to lie about their beliefs. Anyway as long as most teachers uphold their faith while teaching their students I'm sure the whole thing will pan out ok, in spite of the pagan machinations of those who would see the state in full control.

What are the pagans up to?

Obliq · 16-01-2014 04:56PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

I think it matters a great deal what people believe and that the RCC should teach the truths it holds dear (and that I find compelling) to the ends of the earth.

I don't believe, however, that we should tell other people what religion they are.

I'm hoping you'll agree that what I believe matters equally as much as what you believe and are therefore of the understanding that observance of a particular religion in a STATE school, disadvantages children who are not of that faith? Whether a majority of parents like it or not - the state says it's unconstitutional to discriminate, but that is exactly what happens in RCC national schools all over the country.

I don't believe I'd be telling anyone what religion they are/should be by requesting the Dept of Ed take the RCC teaching of prayers away from my children and stick them somewhere rather unholy.

catallus · 16-01-2014 04:56PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I just saw that someone is trying to get some funding for a short documentary about a priest who invited two "members of the LGBT community" to address a Novena in Dundalk last year. Once again I wonder why that priest is still a priest and why anyone in the Church who didn't protest about it considers themselves Catholic.

You seem to be under the misapprehension that the church is some sort of fundamentalist institution that brooks no argument and is seething with rage which can only be sated by pouring boiling oil down the throats of anyone who says the earth travels around the sun? This is a medieval attitude.

There is constant chatter, debate and communion between anyone who wishes to engage in it.

Bannasidhe · 16-01-2014 04:59PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Yes.

Does this mean when you said

Quote:
I don't believe, however, that we should tell other people what religion they are.

What you meant was

Quote:
I don't believe, however, that we should tell other people what religion they are unless they are our children

Yes. Absolutely. That's what I meant. I didn't mention children in my previous post.

I beleive that parents have the right and responsibility to raise children with religious belief's they deem appropriate.

No, you didn't mention children. You made a definitive statement which, following a request for clarification, you have now amended.

You do believe that people should be told what religion they are by their parents. That is not the same as 'I don't believe, however, that we should tell other people what religion they are.' which is what you originally said.

What about the parents who do not want their children to receive any religious instruction or do not wish their children to be instructed in the Roman Catholic religion?

Where is their 'right and responsibility to raise children with religious belief's they deem appropriate'?

Are these rights and responsibilities geographically limited?

Are they available only to those who live within certain urban areas?

Brown Bomber · 16-01-2014 05:01PM

King Mob wrote: »

Hold up. Don't you argue that because these guys supposedly do these things it means they aren't proper Muslims, therefore aren't devout enough to commit terrorism, therefore it indicates a conspiracy?

So as an all-or-nuttin'er, do you think they were Muslim?

Of course I think they were Muslim. However, they both engaged in many behaviours that were haram (sinful) or unislamic. They were far from being Muslim fundamentalists.

Can you honestly differentiate between these terms?

Muslim
Fundamentalist
Sin
Unislamic

Can you not understand that a Muslim can carry out unislamic acts and still be Muslim? Can you honestly not understand that a Christian can be unchristian in thought or deed and remain Christian?

Can you genuinely not understand that the relationship between an individual and their religion has absolutely nothing to do with you? That no matter how important you think your opinion is you cannot force it onto them? You have no right to impose your narrow worldview onto others.

So, are Atta and Tsarnaev Muslims. Yes or No?

magicbastarder · 16-01-2014 05:02PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Again, bringing it back to the census, John is free to self identify himself as he pleases. He's free to scribble in "Jedi Knight" if he wants.

as far as i know, he is not; it's an offence to lie on the census.
however, as the census is confidential, it makes prosecuting the offence somewhat difficult.

I Heart Internet · 16-01-2014 05:06PM

Obliq wrote: »

I'm hoping you'll agree that what I believe matters equally as much as what you believe and are therefore of the understanding that observance of a particular religion in a STATE school, disadvantages children who are not of that faith? Whether a majority of parents like it or not - the state says it's unconstitutional to discriminate, but that is exactly what happens in RCC national schools all over the country.

As I've pointed out time and again on this thread - there are no more than 9 state schools in the country. I suspect you're thinking of schools owned and run by religious communities that are funded by the state. Very different.

I Heart Internet · 16-01-2014 05:08PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I just saw that someone is trying to get some funding for a short documentary about a priest who invited two "members of the LGBT community" to address a Novena in Dundalk last year. Once again I wonder why that priest is still a priest and why anyone in the Church who didn't protest about it considers themselves Catholic.

Why would people change religion because of one thing they disagree over??

Bannasidhe · 16-01-2014 05:08PM

catallus wrote: »

You seem to be under the misapprehension that the church is some sort of fundamentalist institution that brooks no argument and is seething with rage which can only be sated by pouring boiling oil down the throats of anyone who says the earth travels around the sun? This is a medieval attitude.

There is constant chatter, debate and communion between anyone who wishes to engage in it.

However, The Inquisition still exists - albeit re-branded.

The institution of the Inquisition persisted after the end of the witch-trial period in the 18th century, but in the Age of Reason was abolished outside of the Papal States after the Napoleonic wars of the early 19th century. The institution survives as part of the Roman Curia, renamed to Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office in 1904.

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

The RCC may no longer (be allowed) have their anger sated by pouring boiling oil down the throats of those who disagree but they do still silence critics - as Fr Tony Flannery found out...

So one of the best-known and most-valued priests in Ireland, a man regarded with respect and affection by so many Catholics here, has been stopped in his tracks – his life's mission brought to an abrupt halt.

Why? Because of his work as a founder member of the Association of Catholic Priests (ACP). And also because of some passages in articles he had written for the Redemptorist magazine Reality.

Both of these matters had come to the attention of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in Rome, the body Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger presided over before becoming Pope. The CDF has existed for centuries and is the powerful church body based in the Vatican whose job it is to promote and safeguard Catholic doctrine and take action when there are transgressions among the clergy or the faithful.

The CDF presumably did not like the perceived potential challenge to the existing power structure in the Catholic Church in Ireland which the ACP represented. And the CDF presumably did not like some of the views Fr Flannery had put forward for discussion in his monthly column in Reality, on issues like the attitude of the church to sexuality, birth control, celibacy and the ordination of women, among other topics.

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/books-arts/review-tony-flannerys-question-of-conscience-29578612.html

Soooo - it would appear that the RCC does take action against those who go off message.....

Obliq · 16-01-2014 05:08PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

As I've pointed out time and again on this thread - there are no more than 9 state schools in the country. I suspect you're thinking of schools owned and run by religious communities that are funded by the state.

Ah, ok. If I said NATIONAL schools instead, would you be so good as to answer my question? Y'know, the state funded schools that us mere mortals here in rural Ireland have access to?

Delirium · 16-01-2014 05:09PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Why would people change religion because of one thing they disagree over??

Isn't that the reason for so many branches of Christianity?

swampgas · 16-01-2014 05:10PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

As I've pointed out time and again on this thread - there are no more than 9 state schools in the country. I suspect you're thinking of schools owned and run by religious communities that are funded by the state. Very different.

Jesus, not this again. The state (i.e. all taxpayers, regardless of religion) pays for the schools, despite the fact that they have RCC patronage. That's whats disgusting about it.

Bannasidhe · 16-01-2014 05:11PM

SW wrote: »

Isn't that the reason for so many branches of Christianity?

Approx 41,000 of them....

Those aren't 'branches' - that's a bloody forest!

:pac:

I Heart Internet · 16-01-2014 05:14PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

No, you didn't mention children. You made a definitive statement which, following a request for clarification, you have now amended.

You do believe that people should be told what religion they are by their parents. That is not the same as 'I don't believe, however, that we should tell other people what religion they are.' which is what you originally said. ?

You're dead right Bannasidhe, I was sloppy with my words.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

What about the parents who do not want their children to receive any religious instruction or do not wish their children to be instructed in the Roman Catholic religion?

That is their right and they have my very best wishes.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Where is their 'right and responsibility to raise children with religious belief's they deem appropriate'?

Where? Well they have a right and responsibility by virtue of being parents. They will (as most parents do) do their best, as they see it by their children.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Are these rights and responsibilities geographically limited?

No, they're not. Though access to some types of schools seem to be at the moment. Govt is trying to resolve that issue at the moment, I beleive.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Are they available only to those who live within certain urban areas?

Practically, yes. There seem to be problems in areas where there isn't much demand for non-denominationally schooling.

I Heart Internet · 16-01-2014 05:17PM

Obliq wrote: »

Ah, ok. If I said NATIONAL schools instead, would you be so good as to answer my question? Y'know, the state funded schools that us mere mortals here in rural Ireland have access to?

No is the answer to your original question. Though it is rendered moot by the clarrification I gave. A catholic school can have a catholic ethos and teach the catholic faith.

I Heart Internet · 16-01-2014 05:21PM

swampgas wrote: »

Jesus, not this again. The state (i.e. all taxpayers, regardless of religion) pays for the schools, despite the fact that they have RCC patronage. That's whats disgusting about it.

Yes. This again. It is important to get the facts right.

Privately owned and operated schools with govt funding /= state schools.

This "state school" notion is a fantasy.

All taxpayers (regardless of religion) pay for education, therefore all taxpayers have the same rights. Why is this disgusting to you?

Every person is free to choose which school they would like to educate their children in.

That there is a shortage of non-denominational school places is not a problem for the catholic church. That is the government's issue.....it's also the issue of parents who want these places but do nothing about it (except moan at dinner parties).

Brown Bomber · 16-01-2014 05:23PM

Cabaal wrote: »

Ok so how are you coming to the assumption that they are not all hypocrites?

We've already confirmed the Vatican are hypocrites, thats known by everyone at this stage....except for those that want to deny abuses and the Vatican's role in covering up abuses.

For somebody outside of the Vatican then they must lead their life by something, the bible would be the source for such teachings. This is the word of god according to the catholic faith.

If you follow the bible then without a doubt you are a hypocrite, as although you read the word of god you sure as hell don't follow the word of god.

Isn't it also hypocritical to attach and blame something negative on the specific religion of somebody when they have done something negative -- e.g. "Islamic" terrorism carried out by people whose actions in everyday life disqualifies them from being Muslim by the strict fundamentalist atheist/Islamic view when you feel you can also disqualify Christians as being Christians for the very same reasons.

It's one or the other. Either all are infidels or none are. Which is it?

Obliq · 16-01-2014 05:26PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

No

Charming.

A catholic school can have a catholic ethos and teach the catholic faith.

Ah. And here's what's interesting about that. A person of a different faith who has to send their child to your "catholic" school due to geographical and community considerations, is required to facilitate all these catholic families in their faith formation by supervising their child during school hours while the catholic children use up curriculum time and teachers (paid for by us all) doing non-curricular activities in the church.

And you still think that's ok? Says quite a lot about "christian" values that they need the good will of people not of their faith, or their religion would die a rapid death.

Delirium · 16-01-2014 05:26PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Yes. This again. It is important to get the facts right.

Privately owned and operated schools with govt funding /= state schools.

This "state school" notion is a fantasy.

All taxpayers (regardless of religion) pay for education, therefore all taxpayers have the same rights. Why is this disgusting to you?

Every person is free to choose which school they would like to educate their children in.

That there is a shortage of non-denominational school places is not a problem for the catholic church. That is the government's issue.....it's also the issue of parents who want these places but do nothing about it (except moan at dinner parties).

The bolded are contradictory statements.

swampgas · 16-01-2014 05:28PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Yes. This again. It is important to get the facts right.

Privately owned and operated schools with govt funding /= state schools.

This "state school" notion is a fantasy.

All taxpayers (regardless of religion) pay for education, therefore all taxpayers have the same rights. Why is this disgusting to you?

Every person is free to choose which school they would like to educate their children in.

That there is a shortage of non-denominational school places is not a problem for the catholic church. That is the government's issue.....it's also the issue of parents who want these places but do nothing about it (except moan at dinner parties).

That's just semantics: the RCC patroned state-funded primary schools are in effect de facto state schools, and they have a near monopoly on primary education. Anyhow, leaving that aside ...

I absolutely agree that it is the government's problem, and I think they should get on with fixing it. However there is a (IMO) massively lazy majority that simply don't care about fixing it, regardless of the impact on the significant minority of people who simply can't find a national school within driving distance that doesn't indoctrinate kids with what they may consider to be repulsive RCC nonsense.

Living in a rural area, my options are RCC or RCC, and if I don't like it, seems to me you think I should just suck it up?

Obliq · 16-01-2014 05:30PM

swampgas wrote: »

Living in a rural area, my options are RCC or RCC, and if I don't like it, seems to me you think I should just suck it up?

Yeah, that would be the "christian" part of his message alright. I picked that up too.

Exactly what percentage of the population is "christian"?

Comments