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…3536384041…70

Comments

  • #1112
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,179 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    The first question in that survey would be "What is your religion".
    what difference does it make which of the two questions is asked first? the resulting answers still aren't logical.

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



  • #1113
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    SW wrote: »
    what difference does it make which of the two questions is asked first? the resulting answers still aren't logical.
    So what is the point of the survey then? Why don't they just ask the religion of the respondent and then tick all the boxes themselves.

    Homophobic - Check
    Anti-abortion - Check
    Weekly mass goer - check
    100% belief in the existence of God. - Check
    etc.

    They ask the question of Catholics because they acknowledge the shades of grey and nuances therein.


  • #1114
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Ahhh...you were doing so well and then you had to spoil it all by saying something stoopid like* feed their superiority complex


    That is the honest impression that I get. I shouldn't have singled you out before as you weren't alone, your post was the most recent at the time, but you were mocking people for answering a personal question the "wrong" way


  • #1115
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,179 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    So what is the point of the survey then? Why don't they just ask the religion of the respondent and then tick all the boxes themselves.

    Homophobic - Check
    Anti-abortion - Check
    Weekly mass goer - check
    100% belief in the existence of God. - Check
    etc.

    They ask the question of Catholics because they acknowledge the shades of grey and nuances therein.

    Or they maybe should reconsider labelling themselves Catholic if they don't believe the creator that their whole religion hinges on.

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



  • #1116
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    That is the honest impression that I get. I shouldn't have singled you out before as you weren't alone, your post was the most recent at the time, but you were mocking people for answering a personal question the "wrong" way

    I was mocking people was I?

    Whom did I mock?

    Did you report this?

    Or have you taken it upon yourself to be the righter of wrongs in these here parts employing a Biblical eye for an eye approach?


  • Advertisement
  • #1117
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,375 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Piliger wrote: »
    Threatening to withhold a facet of it's ritual is something well within their rights and could in no rational or reasonable way be interpreted as 'coercion'. It may be offensive and aggressive - and it is both - but it is not even close to being coercive.

    Replace the RCC with the Boy Scouts. If the BS said to the Ministers they could not come to jamboree if they voted for gay marriage .... is that coercion ? No. No. No.
    Oh yes it is.
    I Heart Internet wrote: »
    No. You can fight for/demand change. Just don't be surprised when people disagree with you when you tell them you'd like to change their catholic owned and run national school into the "Stephen Fry Academy".
    That would be awesome. Funny, interesting and publicly a stand up guy, I could understand a waiting list for a school like that if it lived up to his reputation.


  • #1118
    swampgas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 3,644 ✭✭✭swampgas


    Piliger wrote: »
    No offence, but I regret to have to say that you and some others hereabouts suffer from what I and many others in the world find one of the most abhorrent characteristics in human beings - certainty. It is certainty that brings us oppression, intolerance and extremism.


    Quite certain of that, are you?


  • #1119
    Piliger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    Obliq wrote: »
    Ya think?! *coughs*. I would be extremely interested to see how many of my fellow parents of kids in my local NS would actually follow through with all the rigours required to get children remembering their lines, repeating stuff the parents forgot years ago, and forcing their 12 yr olds to Sunday school to listen to Fr. whatever waffling on about inclusiveness (while they repeatedly check their iphones for a signal).

    THAT'S what I mean by saying I'd love to see it. I'd love to see cultural catholics having to do the do towards their own "faith", and the subsequent hand wringing about how the church's attendance has haemorrhaged. Surprise!! Looking forward to it is not a crime :D

    I would equally look forward to it.


  • #1120
    Piliger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    robindch wrote: »
    Actually, it's quite an interesting question.

    Even more interesting still is to see you avoid answering it without even the pretense of civility. If that lack continues, I'll be reaching for my cardpack and my banstick.

    I don't recall much 'civility' in my being called a liar. I'll withdraw from this discussion now if one rule is applied to one side and not the other. Have fun.


  • #1121
    catallus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭catallus


    The whole problem stems from the artificial separation of the Church and the State.

    Because such a diametrically immoral and logically incorrect condition is imposed by secularists and others of little faith, comprehension and intelligence our society is being dragged through the mud to the glee of the paganists.


  • Advertisement
  • #1122
    The Black Oil
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Regional East Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 19,507 CMod ✭✭✭✭The Black Oil


    Are you subbing for John Waters?

    Moderator: Television, Psychology and Dublin County North.

    CMod: Entertainment



  • #1123
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,179 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    catallus wrote: »
    The whole problem stems from the artificial separation of the Church and the State.

    Because such a diametrically immoral and logically incorrect condition is imposed by secularists and others of little faith, comprehension and intelligence our society is being dragged through the mud to the glee of the paganists.

    seriously, what's your problem with pagans?

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



  • #1124
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    SW wrote: »
    Or they maybe should reconsider labelling themselves Catholic if they don't believe the creator that their whole religion hinges on.
    I'd agree but you are taking it to extremes. A Catholic that uses contraception is still a Catholic, for example.

    If it helps I can list off some things that should exclude you from being Catholic, and I am not expert but this should cover some of the bases. I should point out it is flat out rejection, not ignorance nor doubt.

    Belief in God. Belief in a soul. Belief in some form of afterlife. Belief in sin.
    Belief in Jesus, his son. His Crucifixion and reserruction.


  • #1125
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Who said anything about anyone "wanting a label"? Give a verifiable reference of a single case of this happening!

    How about all the "catholics" who support gay marriage, access to abortion, access to contraception and don't believe in god? (references in previous posts you ran away from).
    They don't call themselves catholic because their beliefs actually align with the church.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    What I have been saying ad infinitum is that people have the right to consider themselves the religion of their choice if their BELIEFS are broadly in line (to the best of their knowledge) with the Church they have affiliated themselves with.

    Then what about all the "catholics" who support gay marriage, access to abortion, access to contraception and don't believe in god? (references in previous posts you ran away from).
    Should we not correct these people as their beliefs are not at all in line with the church and they are simply ignorant of that fact?
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    What I have also been saying ad infinitum is that while the census is imperfect it surveys the entire population and therefore it is the best available count that we have. It doesn't matter if all 3,000 "atheists" in Ireland chip in with anecdotal and unverifiable stuff and refuse to accept it.

    It doesn't matter that it surveys the entire country, it asks the wrong question
    The references given in this thread have not been anecdotal or unverifiable, they are multiple independent professionally conducted surveys, asking multiple questions, with plenty of links given.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    If all we need is a survey of 1,000 people to "debunk" it then why not just do a survey a 1,000 people instead and save millions?

    The census asks more than just the question about religion, so even if we got rid of that question, it would still have use for the other details it acquires. And, again, the surveys of a 1000 people don't debunk it, they debunk your use of it, as they ask different questions.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    What also bothers me as a secularist is that "atheists" aren't embracing the fact that Catholics aren't as brainwashed on social issues as they thought, that Catholics are more sceptical and less dogmatic than they thought, that there is now a more progressive Pope. Instead they fight it.

    Atheists aren't fighting it, they are pushing it to its logical conclusion. Its great that more and more people in this country are rejecting oppressive catholic doctrine, but it would be even better if they rejected the label, as it doesn't apply to them and holding onto the label only helps the organisation they are rejecting.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    It's almost like they need this conservative caricature of the Christian to justify their hatred. They need this cardboard cutout to feed their superiority complex when the reality turns out that the "enemy" is perhaps not so different from them after all.

    Its almost as if you didn't answer my question at all, you just tried to dodge it again.
    If we have to accept that the religion question in the census is impaired by the fact that a large proportion of the population is ignorant of RCC doctrine, what use is the answer? Should we approach the other questions with the same view?


  • #1126
    catallus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭catallus


    SW wrote: »
    seriously, what's your problem with pagans?

    A pagan killed my father.

    Look, the only thing that is important for any Catholic (or any Christian) is belief in the coming Resurrection of Christ. Nothing else matters. If that belief is non-existent in a person then there is no faith at all; if the promise of Jesus Christ to return to this world in Judgment of the Living and in Judgment of the Dead is not to be fulfilled then all of Christianity will be shown to be a cruel hoax, from "Love your Neighbour as Yourself" to "Thou shalt not Kill" and including the instruction to not only forgive but to love your enemy, all will be shown to be a lie.

    Now, any of that is pretty hard to believe in; but that is the mystery of Faith that has been examined by thinkers since people could write; it is not surprising or novel that scorn is poured over the faithful; but any person whose scorn is based on the sad word-play and unfunny pedantry that has been shown over the past 75 pages here needs to have a good talk to themselves and examine what it is they think about such things.


  • #1127
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    So what is the point of the survey then? Why don't they just ask the religion of the respondent and then tick all the boxes themselves.

    Homophobic - Check
    Anti-abortion - Check
    Weekly mass goer - check
    100% belief in the existence of God. - Check
    etc.

    They ask the question of Catholics because they acknowledge the shades of grey and nuances therein.

    If the RCC says no to gay marriages (and it does) and a person says yes (and many so called catholics do) then that is not a matter of shades of grey, that is different ends of the colour spectrum.
    Issues like gay marriage, access to abortion, access to contraception and the existence of god are not ambiguous pieces of doctrine in the RCC, only discussed rarely and abstractly. They are fundamental doctrine, asserted with certainty, regularly and usually to the detriment of populations forced to accept them.

    You keep trying to portray it like two people arguing over the regulation size of a football in soccer, when its more like one person playing soccer and the other person clay pidgeon shooting.


  • #1128
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Piliger wrote: »
    I don't recall much 'civility' in my being called a liar. I'll withdraw from this discussion now if one rule is applied to one side and not the other. Have fun.

    You mean in post #711? 400 posts ago, with a mod coming in shortly after to calm the situation down?
    Its a bit rich to suddenly complain about having been called a liar in a post which misrepresents what happened.

    If you have no answer for my question then just admit it, its pretty clear anyway given your poor attempt at an escape here.


  • #1129
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Piliger wrote: »
    It makes complete sense. Liars lie.
    No it doesn't. Liars lie for their benefit, unless you are speculating that the church is lying compulsively.
    Piliger wrote: »
    In your opinion. Your inability to see the truth is your issue not mine.
    Not in my opinion. If there was a beneficial reason for them lying you could point to it. You haven't. You mostly likely can't.
    Piliger wrote: »
    No. I never said that. But I don't believe the RCC survey or any RCC survey.
    So then what about the surveys you were given that weren't from the church?


  • #1130
    alaimacerc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    catallus wrote: »
    A pagan killed my father.
    Is this funny?
    Look, the only thing that is important for any Catholic (or any Christian) is belief in the coming Resurrection of Christ.

    I think you got your tenses or syntax a tad muddled there. Or else your theology. All "mainline" Christians hold that JC is already risen, and is merely yet to return.

    It's clear from the various surveys that a very significant proportion of "Catholics" would disqualify themselves on those grounds alone. Though your test (as you yourself imply above) fails to distinguish between any of the major (and most of the minor) denominations. Shouldn't one believe at least some of the things that distinguish Catholics from Protestants to identify as either? Or is it purely a matter of which church is it it's the most convenient to not go to?
    [...]Christianity will be shown to be a cruel hoax, from "Love your Neighbour as Yourself" to "Thou shalt not Kill" and including the instruction to not only forgive but to love your enemy, all will be shown to be a lie.
    Most of the Sermon on the Mount wouldn't look out of place in most other religions, or indeed much secular moral philosophy. The proposition that all stands or falls on the metaphysics is unconvincing to many of us. (Which is just as well, because many of us firmly believe that the metaphysics very much falls.)


  • #1131
    alaimacerc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    catallus wrote: »
    The whole problem stems from the artificial separation of the Church and the State.

    Because such a diametrically immoral and logically incorrect condition is imposed by secularists and others of little faith, comprehension and intelligence our society is being dragged through the mud to the glee of the paganists.

    I'm getting very Poe vibes. Is this just a parody account? Has it really been keeping up this sort of tone for 1k+ posts?


  • Advertisement
  • #1132
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    I'd agree but you are taking it to extremes. A Catholic that uses contraception is still a Catholic, for example.

    If it helps I can list off some things that should exclude you from being Catholic, and I am not expert but this should cover some of the bases. I should point out it is flat out rejection, not ignorance nor doubt.

    Belief in God. Belief in a soul. Belief in some form of afterlife. Belief in sin.
    Belief in Jesus, his son. His Crucifixion and reserruction.

    Ok I have to ask: People have been asking for some sort of criteria for being a catholic, why the hell could this not have been done earlier? Why must we beat you over the head with your repeated logical fallacies again and again to drive answers out of you? Wouldn't it be quicker and more enjoyable to just come straight out with honest answers and allow the discussion to advance?

    Hey, remember when we were arguing about Christmas being defined as christian or secular or both? I showed conclusively that it was both and then you claimed that was your point all along (last section)? Lookie what I found from 400 posts before that:
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    But it is by definition a "purely Christian festival". Being celebrated by non-Christians due to our Christian heritage can't change this.
    How many posts of people calling you on this, only for when you are debunked with such finality that you try and turn it around to being the point you were making all along. This is endemic of your posting on this thread, this forum even - argue, argue, argue, get painfully and repeatedly debunked until eventually "actually my point has always been (insert 180 degree turn)". Even now your argument has changed from page after page of contradicting people who point out some criteria that makes someone catholic (according to the cathechism) claiming we just can't do that, to (with a perfectly straight face) pointing out some criteria that makes someone catholic yourself.

    All I can say is that with the amount of goalpost moving you do, your glutes and traps must be magnificent.


  • #1133
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    catallus wrote: »
    Look, the only thing that is important for any Catholic (or any Christian) is belief in the coming Resurrection of Christ. Nothing else matters. If that belief is non-existent in a person then there is no faith at all;

    So what you are saying is that if someone doesn't believe that Jesus is going to be resurrected, then they aren't a christian? Even if they might think are a christian?


  • #1134
    catallus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭catallus


    alaimacerc wrote: »
    I'm getting very Poe vibes. Is this just a parody account? Has it really been keeping up this sort of tone for 1k+ posts?

    How did you get Poe, of all people, from that????

    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    So what you are saying is that if someone doesn't believe that Jesus is going to be resurrected, then they aren't a christian? Even if they might think are a christian?

    That's a good starting point MarkHamill, yes.


  • #1135
    alaimacerc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    The first question in that survey would be "What is your religion".

    "Objection, leading the witness!"

    Not being paying attention to the basic themes of this discussion at all? Skewing questioning towards a presumption of "having a religion" absent any prior evidence of "religious belief" or "religious practice" is precisely what leads to the phenomenon of all these Atheist Catholics, Spiritualist Catholics, Agnostic Catholics, Protestant Catholics, plus of course all those Absentee Catholics.


  • #1136
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Ok I have to ask: People have been asking for some sort of criteria for being a catholic, why the hell could this not have been done earlier? Why must we beat you over the head with your repeated logical fallacies again and again to drive answers out of you? Wouldn't it be quicker and more enjoyable to just come straight out with honest answers and allow the discussion to advance?

    Hey, remember when we were arguing about Christmas being defined as christian or secular or both? I showed conclusively that it was both and then you claimed that was your point all along (last section)? Lookie what I found from 400 posts before that:

    How many posts of people calling you on this, only for when you are debunked with such finality that you try and turn it around to being the point you were making all along. This is endemic of your posting on this thread, this forum even - argue, argue, argue, get painfully and repeatedly debunked until eventually "actually my point has always been (insert 180 degree turn)". Even now your argument has changed from page after page of contradicting people who point out some criteria that makes someone catholic (according to the cathechism) claiming we just can't do that, to (with a perfectly straight face) pointing out some criteria that makes someone catholic yourself.

    All I can say is that with the amount of goalpost moving you do, your glutes and traps must be magnificent.

    Don't know what you've been reading but it hasn't been my posts. I would have gladly shared the above at any point had you of asked. I do remember stating on numerous occasions that "ritual isn't belief" to you. All of the above refers to belief. All you have been doing is constantly bringing up issues of ritual, or instances of sinning, or non-total obedience to the Church which are NOT BELIEF.


  • #1137
    alaimacerc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    catallus wrote: »
    How did you get Poe, of all people, from that????

    Nathan, rather than Edgar Allan, if there was some confusion, or that otherwise helps.


  • #1138
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    catallus wrote: »
    That's a good starting point MarkHamill, yes.

    So that just applies to general christians? What about specific types of christian like catholic? Can you list some criteria that a catholic is supposed to believe that makes them catholic (instead of making them another type of christian, like protestant or orthodox christian etc.)


  • #1139
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    alaimacerc wrote: »
    "Objection, leading the witness!"

    Not being paying attention to the basic themes of this discussion at all? Skewing questioning towards a presumption of "having a religion" absent any prior evidence of "religious belief" or "religious practice" is precisely what leads to the phenomenon of all these Atheist Catholics, Spiritualist Catholics, Agnostic Catholics, Protestant Catholics, plus of course all those Absentee Catholics.

    Dear me. What utter bullshine. It's no more "leading" than asking "what is your occupation?" from the outset for a survey that only wants the opinion of plumbers.

    This single, obscure, ad-hoc survey you have been fetishing over is only interested in surveying Catholics. It is natural that they would identify the religion from the very beginning so as to not waste time and money asking questions of people whose answers won't be included in the results.


  • #1140
    catallus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭catallus


    alaimacerc wrote: »
    Nathan, rather than Edgar Allan, if there was some confusion, or that otherwise helps.

    No, that does not "otherwise help".

    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    So that just applies to general christians? What about specific types of christian like catholic? Can you list some criteria that a catholic is supposed to believe that makes them catholic (instead of making them another type of christian, like protestant or orthodox christian etc.)

    Are you just typing stuff for the sake of it? Really, listen to yourself.


  • Advertisement
  • #1141
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Don't know what you've been reading but it hasn't been my posts.

    :confused: Honestly have no idea what the hell you are on about now, this has nothing to do with what I posted, as I linked to two of your older posts in the thread (seriously, open the links if you don't believe me), I quoted a more recent one (I don't know what to say, it's in the first quote box) and referenced your posting style over, well, the whole thread but there are examples even from just the previous page.

    But no, pretend like I'm not talking about anything you have posted already (and that anyone can read). It's not like that doesn't prove my point :rolleyes: :p


Advertisement