Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

OK, so you're an atheist. What next?

1…567810

Comments

  • #272
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 16,275 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    J C wrote: »
    ... BTW are there any Liberal Secularists, like myself, on this thread?
    ... and if there are ... why are they staying so silent?

    You're one of the few posters on this forum who isn't a liberal secularist.


  • #273
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    J C wrote: »
    It is possible to respect the beliefs of people who are not of the ethos of a particular school.

    ...

    ... they should accept the fact that they are at an anti-religion school ... or move somewhere else if it's not to their liking.


    Let's try a quick recap shall we so we're not going round in circles here -

    Czarcasm wrote: »
    Secularism isn't about respecting or disrespecting faith, it's about separating of the influence of faith from matters where it should have no influence. That's not anti-religion, that's "You can have your religion, but respect the fact that other people do not share and do not want to share in your religion".


    Secularism is not anti-theism. It's "Keep it to yourself" ism. If you want your beliefs or lack thereof to be respected, then don't try to impose them on other people. I'm not sure why you're struggling to understand the concept. It's not rocket science!

    The parents in this story were unwilling to accept that because they sent their child to a secular ethos public school, it was against school policy to allow the child to impose her religious beliefs upon a captive audience in the classroom. I've no doubt the child felt humiliated, surprised, shocked, because nobody expects that their parents would drop them in the shìt like that, and yet, well, whaddya know!

    But then to claim that it was unconstitutional religious persecution when their daughter was prevented from preaching to her class that Christmas to her means that all her classmates must die?

    I think the teacher and the school exercised due dilligence towards the rest of the students in this case that they wouldn't have those beliefs imposed upon them unnecessarily and against the ethos of the school, not anti-theist, but secular, there IS a difference.


  • #274
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 39,712 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    J C wrote: »
    A Liberal Secularist believes in the doctrine of the peaceful co-existence and equality of treatment of people of all faiths and none.
    I am such a person ...

    Yet you seem to think that religious control of 98% of primary schools in Ireland is OK, ensuring that children of non-religious parents will inevitably be subjected to indoctrination, and have more or less said that anyone who isn't happy with that can feck off and set up their own school.

    How very tolerant of you.

    but nobody else on this thread can claim to be, after the diatribes of anti-religious bias that has been written here over the past few pages ... and the singular failure of anybody to say that the religious humiliation suffered by that six year old girl shouldn't have happened.

    I remain to be convinced it happened at all. No credible source has been provided despite several requests for same.

    In fact, the reverse was what occurred ... you guys defended it to the hilt

    I for one never defended it. I might defend what actually happened, as opposed to the Faux News report, but again we need a credible report of what actually happened.
    ... and proffered the further allegation, for good measure, that all Christian parents are child abusers, if the pass on their Faith to their children.

    Nope, but it is mentally abusive to tell a six year old that non-religious people (their parents, perhaps) are going to burn in hell and several of us know of children subjected to mental abuse of this sort. Or have had it happen to our own kids... my daughter attends a religious primary school and we have no choice in that.
    J C wrote: »
    For example, Christian ethos schools fully respect the faith position of children from Atheist homes attending their schools

    On the contrary they show no respect at all to the atheist/agnostic position. They wouldn't try to indoctrinate a muslim/hindu/etc child though.

    I'm partial to your abracadabra
    I'm raptured by the joy of it all



  • #275
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Pherekydes wrote: »
    You're one of the few posters on this forum who isn't a liberal secularist.
    Could I ask you how you define a 'liberal secularist'?


  • #276
    Doctor DooM
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,872 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    J C wrote: »
    Could I ask you how you define a 'liberal secularist'?

    I'm pretty sure everyone here would rather love to read yours...


  • Advertisement
  • #277
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    J C wrote: »
    ... BTW are there any Liberal Secularists, like myself, on this thread?
    ... and if there are ... why are they staying so silent?

    JC you're a liberal secularist in the same way as Hitler was a philosemite.


  • #278
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    Czarcasm wrote: »
    You mean just like it shouldn't give parents with Christian beliefs a veto to use their child to turn the secular ethos of a public school on it's head and then claim that the school ethos is in breach of their constitutional rights?

    JC's definition of secularism is "the forcible conversion of everybody on the planet to the exact flavour of religion I hold to, and the persecution of anyone who fails to be converted".

    He really hates it when people disagree with him, especially the ones who show how stupid his ideas are.


  • #279
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 16,275 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    J C wrote: »
    Could I ask you how you define a 'liberal secularist'?

    If you look it up it'll probably say "the opposite of an evangelical creationist theocrat, e.g. JC on boards.ie".


  • #280
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    J C wrote: »
    Could I ask you how you define a 'liberal secularist'?
    I'd define a Liberal Secularist as somebody who believes in the doctrine of the peaceful co-existence and equality of treatment of people of all faiths and none by the state.
    I am such a person.

    How would you define a Liberal Secularist?


  • #281
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    JC's definition of secularism is "the forcible conversion of everybody on the planet to the exact flavour of religion I hold to, and the persecution of anyone who fails to be converted".
    I am liberal in matters of religion ... every person is entitled to freely espouse any religion ... or none, as far as I'm concerned.
    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    He really hates it when people disagree with him, especially the ones who show how stupid his ideas are.
    Hate is not within my vocabulary ... I love all people, just like my God, Jesus Christ does.:)
    ... and I'm not stupid ... and I don't mind at all when anyone disagrees with me ... I have found, as I go through life that I have learned almost as much from people who disagree with me ... as I have from people who agree with me.

    Just because we disagree over something, isn't any reason to fall out with each other ... respect and concern for other people's welfare is the way to go!!!:cool:


  • Advertisement
  • #282
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,151 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    I'd define a Liberal Secularist as somebody who believes in the doctrine of the peaceful co-existence and equality of treatment of people of all faiths and none by the state.
    I am such a person.

    And how does the state ensure such a noble ideal? By separating itself from religion entirely, by not forcing non-Christians to listen to readings from the bible in the classroom for example. Or by not attempting to subvert the science class by teaching Genesis as fact. These are two simple examples that put you at odds with your claims of being a liberal secularist.

    To make everyone across the religious spectrum feel respected the state needs ensure that religion (or irreligion) isn't pressed upon people, especially in state run institutions such as schools. This is why your claims of liberal secularism ring hollow.

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



  • #283
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    SW wrote: »
    And how does the state ensure such a noble ideal? By separating itself from religion entirely, by not forcing non-Christians to listen to readings from the bible in the classroom for example. Or by not attempting to subvert the science class by teaching Genesis as fact. These are two simple examples that put you at odds with your claims of being a liberal secularist.
    The state should stay out of such controversies entirely ...
    ... parents are the prime educators of their children ... and they are perfectly entitled to come together to organise schools that reflect their ethos. If you are in a minority (like Creationists and Atheists are) ... then you can choose the school that most meets your ethos.
    I used to think that this was a Secular school ... but having seen the anti-religious stuff on these threads ... I've changed my mind and now I think that Christian schools, including Roman Catholic schools, will meet my needs and those of my children best.
    The 'last straw' was the defense of the humiliation of that 6 year old Christian child ... and I am now much more wary of where agressive anti-religious Secularism is trying to take us, than I am about Roman Catholocism.
    SW wrote: »
    To make everyone across the religious spectrum feel respected the state needs ensure that religion (or irreligion) isn't pressed upon people, especially in state run institutions such as schools. This is why your claims of liberal secularism ring hollow.
    I don't think that the state should be favouring any worldview ... but neither should it be engaged in helping to repress any worldview either.

    You guys have shown yourselves to be deeply anti-religious ... and you are entitled to be, if that is what you believe ... but ye are not entitled to impose your anti-religious worldview on the rest of society by banning the transmission of faith from parent to child, including within schools that parents have organised in accordance with their ethos or by banning or humiliating pupils that talk about their faith in school.
    Equally, Christian schools should not ban or humiliate pupils who talk about their Atheism in school ... and they don't.

    I'm finding that there is respect for diversity of faith in Christian Schools ... and as these threads indicate that Atheists will not allow or respect religion inside the doors of their schools ... this logically means that people of religion (or their children) can have no place there either.

    If agressive secularism cannot live with respect for diversity of faith expression in their schools, then the most reasonable and logical action is for people of faith to not go there ... and go somewhere where they are respected.

    That way everybody can be happy ... and needless hostility won't be possible.


  • #284
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,151 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    The state should stay out of such controversies entirely ...
    ... parents are the prime educators of their children ... and they are perfectly entitled to come together to organise schools that reflect their ethos. If you are in a minority (like Creationists and Atheists are) ... then you can choose the school that most meets your ethos.
    Highly impractical from a public school system perspective. The state needs to have a school system that favours no religious/irreligious slant. The parents (and clergy) can look after the faith formation outside of the school.
    I used to think that this was a Secular school ... but having seen the anti-religious stuff on these threads ... I've changed my mind and now I think that Christian schools, including Roman Catholic schools, will meet my needs and those of my children best.
    So you're not a liberal secularist. You actually support the current school model that currently has the monopoly on national schools.
    The 'last straw' was the defense of the humiliation of that 6 year old Christian child ... and I am now much more wary of where agressive anti-religious Secularism is trying to take us, than I am about Roman Catholocism ... and I never though I would have to say that!!!
    It's inappropriate to read bible passages in a secular schools classroom. This is anti-religious, the rule applies to religious and non-religious students alike. And this once again shows that you don't display secular tendencies.
    I don't think that the state should be favouring any worldview ... but neither should it be engaged in helping to repress any worldview either.
    And that didn't happen, considering all the other students (some of which were most likely also Christian) managed to discuss Christmas without reading from the bible.
    You guys have shown yourselves to be deeply anti-religious ... and you are entitled to be, if that is what you believe ... but ye are not entitled to impose your anti-religious worldview on the rest of society by banning the transmission of faith from parent to child, including within schools that parents have organised in accordance with their ethos or by banning or humiliating pupils that talk about their faith in school.
    This is just silly. Secularism isn't anti-religious, especially as you were just recently claiming to be a secularist. Stopping a child reading from the bible in school is not prohibiting parents from raising their child as Christian. The parents had sent their child to a secular school and didn't respect the ethos of the school. Plus it isn't humiliating a child to ask them to not break the rules of the school.
    Equally, Christian schools should not ban or humiliate pupils who talk about their Atheism in school ... and they don't.
    What has that to do with a secular school system? A system that has a greater chance of fostering a modern and inclusive attitude to people of other worldviews in comparison to a school only focussed on one perspective.
    I'm finding that there is respect for diversity of faith in Christian Schools ... and as these threads indicate that Atheists will not allow or respect religion inside the doors of their schools ... this logically means that people of religion (or their children) can have no place there either.
    No, it logically doesn't. the child in the OP was in a secular school, as well as other Christians, and they had an assignment about Christmas. She wasn't punished for her faux pas. Sounds quite inclusive to me.
    If agressive secularism cannot live with peace and respect for diversity of faith expression in their schools, then the most reasonable and logical action is for people of faith to not go there ... and go somewhere where they are respected.
    Secularism does respect diversity, as evidenced by the class of students discussing their family traditions for Christmas. Reading from religious texts is disrespectful to other students that don't share the readers beliefs.
    That way everybody can be happy ... and needless hostility won't be possible.
    the only hostility so far is that which is being manufactured by religious groups that don't like that the bible can't be read in a public classroom.

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



  • #285
    The Black Oil
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Regional East Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 19,448 CMod ✭✭✭✭The Black Oil


    JC, I do not feel your characterisation above is true of me, personally. I think I'm a pretty relaxed atheist in general. My issue in relation to education is specifically around the approach thus far which has been excessive favouritism to a segment of the population based in part on the nonsense that 'this is a Catholic country'. A phrase used as a threat or intimidation tactic when I was in school and in the scouts. I would imagine many others experienced the same. Much more diversity of choice is needed across the Irish school landscape, but it will be resisted.

    Moderator: Television, Psychology and Dublin County North.

    CMod: Entertainment



  • #286
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    SW wrote: »
    Highly impractical from a public school system perspective. The state needs to have a school system that favours no religious/irreligious slant.
    Why does the state need to have an irreligious school system?
    It's none of it's business to favour irreligion or anti-religion.
    It's the business of parents (and nobody else) to decide on whether they want to send their children to a religious or an irreligious school
    SW wrote: »
    The parents (and clergy) can look after the faith formation outside of the school.
    If parents want religion to be taught in school they are quite entitled to organise such schools ... and if other parents want irreligion to be taught under the guise of 'logic' (as a poster earlier described his anti-religious beliefs) ... then they are quite entitled to organise such schools ... and parents can decide which school type they will choose.
    SW wrote: »
    So you're not a liberal secularist. You actually support the current school model that currently has the monopoly on national schools.
    I favour respect for parental choice ... and respect for their faith ... and those of their children. You guys have clearly said that religion has no place in secular schools ... and this logically means that relgious people have no place there either.

    SW wrote: »
    It's inappropriate to read bible passages in a secular schools classroom. This is anti-religious, the rule applies to religious and non-religious students alike. And this once again shows that you don't display secular tendencies.
    There is nothing anti-religious about reading Bible passages ... but it's banning certainly is anti-religious and indeed anti-christian.
    However, if secular schools ban religion on their premises, they are perfectly entitled to do so ... and people of faith are quite entitled to walk the other way, with their children.

    SW wrote: »
    And that didn't happen, considering all the other students (some of which were most likely also Christian) managed to discuss Christmas without reading from the bible.
    Why should a Christian child not read Bible verses when discussing what the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ at Christmas means to them. Are anti-religious Secularists so anti-Christian that they cannot listen to a Bible verse ?
    What is wrong with you guys?
    SW wrote: »
    This is just silly. Secularism isn't anti-religious, especially as you were just recently claiming to be a secularist. Stopping a child reading from the bible in school is not prohibiting parents from raising their child as Christian. The parents had sent their child to a secular school and didn't respect the ethos of the school. Plus it isn't humiliating a child to ask them to not break the rules of the school.
    I don't think that anybody should be disrespected for their faith (or lack of faith). Having said that, if it is made clear that a secular school will not tolerate any manifestation of faith within their premises then logically, people of faith should go somewhere else. It shouldn't have to happen in a truly pluralist school operating to liberal secular standards ... but if a school isn't operating to these standards then people of faith shouldn't stay where they are not wanted or respected.
    SW wrote: »
    What has that to do with a secular school system? A system that has a greater chance of fostering a modern and inclusive attitude to people of other worldviews in comparison to a school only focussed on one perspective.
    How is it 'inclusive' to humiliate a six year old because of her faith?
    How is it 'inclusive' to call Christians child abusers because they transmit their faith to their children?
    How is it 'inclusive' to ban all religious expression in a school?
    SW wrote: »
    No, it logically doesn't. the child in the OP was in a secular school, as well as other Christians, and they had an assignment about Christmas. She wasn't punished for her faux pas. Sounds quite inclusive to me.
    The correct course of action IMO would be to take your child out of any school that doesn't respect your faith ... and move them to one that does.
    SW wrote: »
    Secularism does respect diversity, as evidenced by the class of students discussing their family traditions for Christmas. Reading from religious texts is disrespectful to other students that don't share the readers beliefs.
    What is disrespectful about stating what you believe about God?
    SW wrote: »
    the only hostility so far is that which is being manufactured by religious groups that don't like that the bible can't be read in a public classroom.
    Like I say, the correct course of action if your children are being disrespected ... is to take your children somewhere else, where they are not.


  • #287
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,151 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    Why does the state need to have an anti-religious school system?
    It's none of it's business to favour irreligion or anti-religion.
    It's the business of parents (and nobody else) to decide on whether they want to send their children to a religious or an anti-religious school
    Why do you do that so much, misrepresent what people are saying. Nowhere have I said that the state needs to have an anti-religious school system. I've been saying that it should be neutral, neither religious or anti-religious. Where you would rather that it be religious, you have said that you're in favour of RCC schools over secular schools.
    If parents want religion to be taught in school they are quite entitled to organise such schools ... and if other parents want irreligion to be taught under the guise of 'logic' (and a poster earlier described his anti-religious beliefs ... then they are quite entitled to organise such schools ... and parents can decide which school type they will choose.
    All of which has nothing to do with a public school system that is inclusive. You're advocating schools divided on religious lines. Not a good idea for fostering inclusiveness in the minds of the young.
    I favour respect for parental choice ... and respect for their faith ... and those of their children. You guys have clearly said that religion has no place in secular schools ... and this logically means that relgious people have no place there either.
    Only for those that struggle with logic. The school in the OP is a secular school with Christian students. Only one student didn't appreciate that reading the bible in class isn't appropriate (or respectful to other students).
    There is nothing anti-religious about reading Bible passages ... but it's banning certainly is anti-religious and indeed anti-christ.
    This just highlights that you don't understand secularism. Which is baffling since you claimed to be a liberal secularist.
    However, if secular schools ban religion on their premises, they are perfectly entitled to do so ... and people of faith are quite entitled to walk the other way, with their children.
    Of course. That's why some religious groups start up private faith schools.
    Why should a Christian child no read Bible verses when discussing what the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ at Christmas means to them.
    Because it's a secular school. The state can't allow evangelising to happen in the class, whether it's Christmas or not.
    Are anti-religious Secularists so anti-Christian that they cannot listen to a Bible verse?
    What is wrong with you guys?
    Nothing. Why can't Christians respect other beliefs instead of evangelising in the classroom? What is wrong with you guys? :rolleyes:

    I don't think that anybody should be disrespected for their faith (or lack of faith). Having said that, if it is made clear that a secular school will not tolerate any manifestation of faith within their premises then logically, people of faith should go somewhere else. It shouldn't have to happen in a truly pluralist school operating to liberal secular standards ... but if a school isn't operating to these standards then people of faith shouldn't stay where they are not wanted or respected.
    So liberal secular standards allow for bible reading in classrooms? JC, you'd do well to avoid using terminology that you don't understand to avoid egg on your face. Bible reading in class is at odds with liberal secularism.
    How is it 'inclusive' to humiliate a six year old because of her faith?
    Didn't happen. Student was asked not to read from the bible.
    How is it 'inclusive' to call Christians child abusers because the transmit their faith to their children?
    Teacher did no such thing.
    How is it 'inclusive' to ban all religious expression in your school?
    Very. It treats all students as the same and doesn't view them along religious lines.
    The correct course of action IMO would be to take your child out of any school that doesn't respect your faith ... and move them to one that does.
    and the Christian childs parents are free to move to school that caters exclusively to Christian values.
    What is disrespectful about stating what you believe about God?
    It's disrespectful to the other students that manage not to attempt their religion in the classroom. They didn't press their religion on the child, why shouldn't she return the favour to those students?
    Like I say, the correct course of action where your children are being disrespected ... is to take your children somewhere else, where they are not.
    If not allowing someone to read the bible where it's inappropriate is disrespectful then it's probably best the parents not let the child out of the house. At least until she learns some social skills and respect to others.

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



  • #288
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    J C wrote: »
    I am liberal in matters of religion ... every person is entitled to freely espouse any religion ... or none, as far as I'm concerned.

    Hate is not within my vocabulary ... I love all people, just like my God, Jesus Christ does.:)
    ... and I'm not stupid ... and I don't mind at all when anyone disagrees with me ... I have found, as I go through life that I have learned almost as much from people who disagree with me ... as I have from people who agree with me.

    Just because we disagree over something, isn't any reason to fall out with each other ... respect and concern for other people's welfare is the way to go!!!:cool:

    The truth hurts doesn't it, you little fabulist?


  • #289
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    The truth hurts doesn't it, you little fabulist?

    He has already lied about his 'scientific qualifications', why should he be truthful about anything else? His is the Big Fat Liar, AKA BFL. Not to be confused with the BFG who is closer to reality.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXbxOXCSy9w


  • #290
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    The truth hurts doesn't it, you little fabulist?
    The truth is I am a liberal in matters of religion, I am a Christian and I respect your point of view but I don't always agree with it.

    We have good discussions and conversations and I have learned a lot from them.
    I agree that there should be Secular schools and indeed I attended one myself and it was (and is) a great school with great teachers.

    Faith based schools are also welcoming of all faiths and none and that is also to be applauded for the choice that it offers parents and pupils alike.


  • #291
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    obplayer wrote: »
    He has already lied about his 'scientific qualifications', why should he be truthful about anything else? His is the Big Fat Liar, AKA BFL. Not to be confused with the BFG who is closer to reality.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXbxOXCSy9w
    Please be nice. This adds nothing to the discussion.

    Do you have a substantive point to make about the topic at issue?


  • Advertisement
  • #292
    MrPudding
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,779 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    JC, if the child was humiliated, and I am not convinced she was, then the responsibility for they lies with the parents. Given that every other child was, apparently, able to relate the story of their holiday without resort to the bible, it seems reasonable to assume that it was not unknown that this was a secular school and reading from the bible was not permitted. Despite this the parents, for whatever reason, chose to send their child with an inappropriate presentation. The school did exactly what the parents knew they would.

    Assuming the child was humiliated, though again there is no indication she was, that is a fairly horrible thing to do to your child.

    MrP


  • #293
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    J C wrote: »
    Please be nice. This adds nothing to the discussion.

    Do you have a substantive point to make about the topic at issue?

    My substantive point is rather obvious; you cannot be trusted so why should we listen to you?

    However, to the point in question, how does asking a school pupil to conform to the ethos of the school and the rules of her country's constitution 'humiliate' her?


  • #294
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 39,712 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    J C wrote: »
    Faith based schools are also welcoming of all faiths and none and that is also to be applauded for the choice that it offers parents and pupils alike.

    Well in the catholic school I went to, you were harangued, scorned and ridiculed if you questioned religion in any way. Several other posters in this forum have first hand experience of similar. And putting children to the bottom of the admissions queue on the basis of the religion/lack thereof of their parents is the very opposite of welcoming.

    I'm partial to your abracadabra
    I'm raptured by the joy of it all



  • #295
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    ninja900 wrote: »
    Well in the catholic school I went to, you were harangued, scorned and ridiculed if you questioned religion in any way. Several other posters in this forum have first hand experience of similar. And putting children to the bottom of the admissions queue on the basis of the religion/lack thereof of their parents is the very opposite of welcoming.

    In my faith based school every Monday morning we were asked who had missed mass on Sunday and the offenders had to stand up and explain to the class why. Humiliation perhaps? Still, once I realised that they couldn't possibly have been watching us all on Sunday and had to go by our word, it taught me something useful; how to lie. Religion has it's uses, doesn't it J C?;)


  • #296
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    obplayer wrote: »
    In my faith based school every Monday morning we were asked who had missed mass on Sunday and the offenders had to stand up and explain to the class why. Humiliation perhaps? Still, once I realised that they couldn't possibly have been watching us all on Sunday and had to go by our word, it taught me something useful; how to lie. Religion has it's uses, doesn't it J C?;)

    "I'm not a bad guy! I work hard, and I love my kids. So why should I spend half my Sunday hearing about how I'm going to Hell?" --Homer Simpson

    :D


  • #297
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    Mods, would it be possible to re-name this thread back to something like it's original name? Given that we are now talking about being humiliated in faith based schools could that not be justified? If only to attract new posters.


  • #298
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,473 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Thread renamed -- let's see how this goes :)


  • #299
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    robindch wrote: »
    Thread renamed -- let's see how this goes :)

    Being an atheist stops me from....erm......1 second........hummmmm...... oh i can't....no ........ how about???.....no i can still do that too.........oh i don't....... no wait there,







    Let me get back to you on that one.


  • #300
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    Almighty Mod wrote:
    Ok, so you're an atheist. What next?

    Dunno, bowl of icecream maybe?


  • Advertisement
  • #301
    pauldla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,248 ✭✭✭pauldla


    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    Dunno, bowl of icecream maybe?

    Yeah, some kind of food, definitely. A sandwich, maybe. And then perhaps a bit of a nap. Always goes down well after a morning atheisming.


Advertisement