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

Should religious induction of children be banned?

1…5681011…20

Comments

  • #212
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    FunLover18 wrote: »
    People have clearly seen this idea as an infringement on their rights to practice religion when that could not be further from the truth. Article 42, Section 2.1 which I have quoted as the basis of this argument guarantees 'freedom of conscience and the free profession & and practice of religion'. How is it that everyone has this right except children where the decision is made for them by their parents.


    The Irish Constitution is full of all sorts of weird and wonderful contradictions FunLover. All the above is saying is that every citizen of Ireland has the right to practice their faith without interference from The State. It's nothing to do with prohibiting parents from bringing their children up in their faith, part of which is indoctrinating them in their faith.

    Has anyone who posted on this thread either for or against CHOSEN a religion without having been indoctrinated into it first as child?


    Well my sister was raised Roman Catholic, as was I, and she converted to Islam a couple of years back and brought up her children in the Islam faith. In my son's school there are children of many different faiths and cultures, so I don't think religion is going anywhere any time soon in Ireland. In fact if anything, we may see an upsurge in religion in the next generation with the volume of Immigrants of the various faiths who are far more stringent about their adherence to their faith than Irish people, as Ireland becomes a more multicultural society.


  • #213
    FunLover18
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18


    Kiwi in IE wrote: »
    I suppose my MAJOR issue with religion in Ireland is that it is forced on my child via the school system. It should be my right to bring my child up without having him taught (particularly by professionals employed by the State) that any religion is fact or reality.

    I see complete secularisation of all public institutions as the answer to this issue. Going full circle and imposing on the current imposers is just as bad. Parents should be free to bring their children up as they see fit so long as it dosn't cross the abuse line.

    I don't think religion should be "forced" on children either by their parents or the schools but like I said that does not mean I am against parents educating their children on religion. There is a difference between educating a child on the process of baptism and what it mean, and then actually baptising them.

    I will agree with previous posters that enforcing such a ban would be extremely difficult and the backlash on this thread would be nothing compared to reality.


  • #214
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Pwindedd wrote: »
    I'm not sure the quote you have vastly taken out of context proves anything really - other than Danes and Swedes don't really give much of a sh it about religion. Probably because it doesn't pervade areas of their life unless they seek it out. I'm sure Irish residents would feel less hostile if we had the same attitude to religion here.


    Yet time and time again, certain non religious people on this forum do give a shi t.

    I will reiterate this quote: "An overwhelming majority had in fact been baptized, and many had been confirmed or married in church."

    Most have religion in their lives, here we have people wanting to denounce their baptism.


  • #215
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    I'll stop being hostile to religion when it stops trying to stick its tentacles into the lives of citizens.

    You are letting your dislike influence your life, being hostile is being negative, it won't change anything and you still will be posting your dislike in ten years time as it is not going to change anything.


  • #216
    Sulla Felix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭Sulla Felix


    No, because I don't think religion should have a special place in law. Unless you're also going to make it illegal for parents to pass on all the other crazy shít people believe then you're essentially saying religion has a special status.

    I don't think it should be taught in state funded schools but thats a whole other matter.


  • Advertisement
  • #217
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,222 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    RobertKK wrote: »
    Yet time and time again, certain non religious people on this forum do give a shi t.

    I will reiterate this quote: "An overwhelming majority had in fact been baptized, and many had been confirmed or married in church."

    Most have religion in their lives, here we have people wanting to denounce their baptism.

    And why do we give a shit? Because the Church keeps sticking its nose where it's not wanted nor needed.

    Also, "many" != a majority. Many people voted for Sinn Féin in the last General Election, but they're far from the biggest party in the Dáil.


  • #218
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,222 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    RobertKK wrote: »
    You are letting your dislike influence your life, being hostile is being negative, it won't change anything and you still will be posting your dislike in ten years time as it is not going to change anything.

    How can you be sure that my "hostility" won't change anything within ten years? In fact, how are you defining my "hostility"? Is it the fact that, if I were to raise kids in this country, that I just want them to be able to go to a non-denominational school? Is it the fact that, if I were to become a teacher, I wouldn't want to hide my lack of religious beliefs just to get a job?


  • #219
    Antar Bolaeisk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,091 ✭✭✭Antar Bolaeisk


    I don't think religion should be taught at schools, maybe as a brief overview of a range of religions but even then only as part of some larger subject.

    If the parents want their child brought up believing a certain faith then it should be up to them to teach the kids, maybe the church could organise a Sunday school type setup to help facilitate this.


  • #220
    catallus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭catallus


    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    No, the problem is that it's a hotbed of bigotry. The "Bible Belt" was the bastion of the Jim Crow Laws before the intervention of the federal government, and it took until 2003 for "anti-sodomy" laws across the "Bible Belt" to be struck down by the Supreme Court.

    As for "being deliberately opaque", I would laugh if I wasn't so worn down by your frustrating hypocrisy.

    Neither of those things have very much to do with religion.
    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    And why do we give a shit? Because the Church keeps sticking its nose where it's not wanted nor needed.

    The influence of the church is very much needed! The moral destitution of the people is being sanctioned by secularists.


  • #221
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Kiwi in IE wrote: »
    Non religious New Zealanders are not hostile to religion either (so long as, unlike myself they remain in secular countries). Hostility toward religion happens when other peoples religion is forced upon you (eg Irish Education system). When religion does not intrude into the lives of non religious people, there is very little reason to have issue. I never in my life harboured a negative thought toward religion or even identified as an athiest until I moved to Ireland. The imposition of Catholicism has since turned me into a pretty *militant* athiest who now sees religion as something very negative and intrusive.

    Perhaps Ireland should become properly secular, as is fitting for a First World Western Country, and then non religious Irish people would not feel negatively toward religion either, just like the majority of non religious Swedes and NZers.

    We have the current Catholic education domination of education, because the Catholic church and the Protestant churches at one stage were the only providers of education.

    We could have said no to education which the English government wanted at one point with the penal laws.

    I think some non religious people are bitter and just like complaining rather than setting up their own schools and doing stuff for themselves like Catholics had to do when education to Catholics was banned.

    Meanwhile over in the UK

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10549532/Surge-in-late-baptisms-to-get-into-top-Catholic-schools.html

    Surge in baptisms in England so parents can get their children into Catholic schools...


  • Advertisement
  • #222
    _Redzer_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


    RobertKK wrote: »
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/28/us/28beliefs.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0



    Maybe non-religious Irish people shouldn't be so hostile to religion. Where they make it an issue.

    Well let's see. I don't gives two shíts about religion tbh. If that's your thing, go for it.

    Thing is though, they're largely a notoriously dickish organisation of people. I'm a gay man, they often liken me to a pedophile and try as much as they can to restrict my rights, sometimes going so far to try and criminalise them.

    So yeah, if I've done nothing to them, I'm minding my own business, but they've got a problem with me regardless, and for no reason, so you can bet I'm gonna be hostile towards them if they start it.

    If they minded their own business and didn't try and fúck me over so much I genuinely wouldn't have an issue with them and would respect their beliefs. That's not the case though, and they don't seem to have any respect for me, so why should I for them?

    Treat people as you want to be treated. If they followed that then I don't think we'd have problems.


  • #223
    FunLover18
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18


    Czarcasm wrote: »
    The Irish Constitution is full of all sorts of weird and wonderful contradictions FunLover. All the above is saying is that every citizen of Ireland has the right to practice their faith without interference from The State. It's nothing to do with prohibiting parents from bringing their children up in their faith, part of which is indoctrinating them in their faith.


    I agree the Irish Constitution is a bit of a mess, especially when it comes to religion. The blasphemy section is weird for one.

    But surely the contradiction is saying that people have the right to practice their own faith and then allowing them to indoctrinate others who have not agreed to such indoctrination? Does indoctrination fall under practise?

    If I have the right to practice my own faith, how does my parents choosing to baptise me not count as a violation of that right?


  • #224
    Sulla Felix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭Sulla Felix


    RobertKK wrote: »
    We have the current Catholic education domination of education, because the Catholic church and the Protestant churches at one stage were the only providers of education.
    Because they put their differences aside to stymie the efforts of the British State in the 1800s to set up a secular national school system. Neither church liked the idea of their respective little lambs mixing with each other at school. Too much chance of them realizing there were probably more similarities than the churches would have you believe....


  • #225
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    How can you be sure that my "hostility" won't change anything within ten years? In fact, how are you defining my "hostility"? Is it the fact that, if I were to raise kids in this country, that I just want them to be able to go to a non-denominational school? Is it the fact that, if I were to become a teacher, I wouldn't want to hide my lack of religious beliefs just to get a job?


    It does come across that some non religious want everything handed to them, including Catholic schools which were founded by Catholics.
    The state took polls at some of these schools and for most of these schools the parents wanted the school to remain as it was.
    Why don't militant atheists spend their own money like Catholics had to do originally and set up their own schools?


  • #226
    Pwindedd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,316 ✭✭✭Pwindedd


    RobertKK wrote: »
    Yet time and time again, certain non religious people on this forum do give a shi t.

    I will reiterate this quote: "An overwhelming majority had in fact been baptized, and many had been confirmed or married in church."

    Most have religion in their lives, here we have people wanting to denounce their baptism.

    Being baptised does not equal "having religion in their lives" though. I was christened yet I don't have religion in my life. I'm grand without it. And if someone feels that strongly that they want to denounce their baptism, then should they not have this option?

    I personally feel that by simply not believing, it eradicates any of the meaning or religiosity of my christening. Simply ticking the no religion box is enough for me. Technically I should tick Christian but I'm not, so I don't. Others may feel more strongly. They don't want to be counted as a member of the faith into which they were unknowingly and permanently committed. It shouldn't be impossible leave a faith. I suppose excommunication is one route - and still your only chance there is joining another religion or landing a left hook on the pope!!! The options are not great.


  • #227
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    catallus wrote: »
    The influence of the church is very much needed! The moral destitution of the people is being sanctioned by secularists.

    Im assuming you have some examples of this you can share?


  • #228
    Sulla Felix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭Sulla Felix


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    Im assuming you have some examples of this you can share?

    Going to go out on a limb and say it'll be something about the gheys and/or loose women. :o


  • #229
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Sulla Felix wrote: »
    Going to go out on a limb and say it'll be something about the gheys and/or loose women. :o

    Or abolishing slavery. Damn secularists and their lack of morals.


  • #230
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    FunLover18 wrote: »
    I agree the Irish Constitution is a bit of a mess, especially when it comes to religion. The blasphemy section is weird for one.

    But surely the contradiction is saying that people have the right to practice their own faith and then allowing them to indoctrinate others who have not agreed to such indoctrination? Does indoctrination fall under practise?

    If I have the right to practice my own faith, how does my parents choosing to baptise me not count as a violation of that right?


    Because according to Articles 41.1 and 42.1 -

    1.The State recognises the Family as the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society, and as a moral institution possessing inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law.

    The State acknowledges that the primary and natural educator of the child is the Family and guarantees to respect the inalienable right and duty of parents to provide, according to their means, for the religious and moral, intellectual, physical and social education of their children.


    Source: Constitution of Ireland (Original Text) - Wikipedia


  • #231
    Pwindedd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,316 ✭✭✭Pwindedd


    RobertKK wrote: »
    It does come across that some non religious want everything handed to them, including Catholic schools which were founded by Catholics.
    The state took polls at some of these schools and for most of these schools the parents wanted the school to remain as it was.
    Why don't militant atheists spend their own money like Catholics had to do originally and set up their own schools?

    Dawkins junior school for Militant Atheists? Yeh has a nice ring to it.

    It's state money now though not Catholic money. FFS we don't want to segregate - just educate. It's about their tiny sponge like wonderful little minds and how we can raise them to question, investigate and reach conclusions of their own.


  • Advertisement
  • #232
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    Or abolishing slavery. Damn secularists and their lack of morals.

    Where were secularists the leaders in banning slavery?


  • #233
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,745 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    catallus wrote: »
    The influence of the church is very much needed! The moral destitution of the people is being sanctioned by secularists.
    Please explain how, because I believe that statement to be absolute balderdash. The morals espoused in the bible are truly repugnant; advocating the subjugation of women, the owning of slaves, and the execution of people for trivial reasons.


  • #234
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Pwindedd wrote: »
    Dawkins junior school for Militant Atheists? Yeh has a nice ring to it.

    It's state money now though not Catholic money. FFS we don't want to segregate - just educate. It's about their tiny sponge like wonderful little minds and how we can raise them to question, investigate and reach conclusions of their own.

    It is money from Catholics that make them exist since it was that money that created them.

    It is not using one's brain if one thinks a Catholic for example does not question, investigate or reach conclusions.
    Some atheists like to use Galileo, however he remained a devout Catholic throughout all his life and he investigated and made conclusions.
    Going to a Catholic school doesn't stop this.


  • #235
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    RobertKK wrote: »
    Where were secularists the leaders in banning slavery?

    Not sure, the same place as where they are causing moral destitution of the people probably.

    What I was trying to do is show how we dont actually need the church to tell us about morals. Slavery is condoned in the bible but we dont condone it now. Why? Somehow we managed to decide what is right and wrong despite what the bible says on a matter.
    RobertKK wrote: »
    It is money from Catholics that make them exist since it was that money that created them.

    It is not using one's brain if one thinks a Catholic for example does not question, investigate or reach conclusions.
    Some atheists like to use Galileo, however he remained a devout Catholic throughout all his life and he investigated and made conclusions.
    Going to a Catholic school doesn't stop this.

    Does the catholic church still build its own schools? I thought they just took them over once the state built them, open to correction on this.


  • #236
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    kylith wrote: »
    Please explain how, because I believe that statement to be absolute balderdash. The morals espoused in the bible are truly repugnant; advocating the subjugation of women, the owning of slaves, and the execution of people for trivial reasons.

    Like Obama with drones with the second strike policy against emergency workers attending the scene of his terrorist action?


  • #237
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    Not sure, the same place as where they are causing moral destitution of the people probably.

    What I was trying to do is show how we dont actually need the church to tell us about morals. Slavery is condoned in the bible but we dont condone it now. Why? Somehow we managed to decide what is right and wrong despite what the bible says on a matter.


    It is near 600 years since Pope Eugene IV wrote a Papal encyclical banning slavery with the punishment being excommunication.
    Then a hundred years late Pope Paul III issued a new ban against enslaving the people of the new world.

    While this was going on, Irish people were being put into slavery and sent to the Caribbean...by a nation that opposed the Pope.


  • #238
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    Not sure, the same place as where they are causing moral destitution of the people probably.

    What I was trying to do is show how we dont actually need the church to tell us about morals. Slavery is condoned in the bible but we dont condone it now. Why? Somehow we managed to decide what is right and wrong despite what the bible says on a matter.



    Does the catholic church still build its own schools? I thought they just took them over once the state built them, open to correction on this.


    Yes they originally did, and the previous government at one point stated that the church had saved the state billions of euro because it provided education when the state couldn't afford to.


  • #239
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,745 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    RobertKK wrote: »
    Like Obama with drones with the second strike policy against emergency workers attending the scene of his terrorist action?

    What Obama does or does not do is not part of this discussion. I'm sure that if you wanted to start a thread to discuss Obama's policies you would find plenty of people willing to discuss it there. Please stick to the topic at hand.


  • #240
    catallus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭catallus


    kylith wrote: »
    What Obama does or does not do is not part of this discussion. I'm sure that if you wanted to start a thread to discuss Obama's policies you would find plenty of people willing to discuss it there. Please stick to the topic at hand.

    Which is slavery, right? :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #241
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    RobertKK wrote: »
    It is near 600 years since Pope Eugene IV wrote a Papal encyclical banning slavery with the punishment being excommunication.
    Then a hundred years late Pope Paul III issued a new ban against enslaving the people of the new world.

    While this was going on, Irish people were being put into slavery and sent to the Caribbean...by a nation that opposed the Pope.

    So Jesus and the bible is wrong. Should probably stick a note in there or released a new edition. Makes the bible a bit redundant if the pope can just pick and choose parts that the religion follows.

    Im not sure what opposing the pope has to do with anything. The last pope was connected with covering up child abuse so can see why they would oppose an organisation that would have someone like that as a leader.
    RobertKK wrote: »
    Yes they originally did, and the previous government at one point stated that the church had saved the state billions of euro because it provided education when the state couldn't afford to.

    You must have misunderstood me. I asked:
    Does the catholic church still build its own schools? I thought they just took them over once the state built them, open to correction on this.


Advertisement
Advertisement