Atheist Ireland Forum

Yeah i have no idea why i still worry about his feelings???? if it wasnt for my boyfriend believe me i would have told father in law what i thought of him a long time ago! There is a part of me that is scared of telling him my child won t be RC for some reason, but also another side of me that is secretly pleased with myself, and i tell you something if my mum was still alive she would be proud of me for not giving into it.

It's amazing how easy it is for in-laws to cause hurt...

In my situation, my wife and I were married for 4 years when she got pregnant. When we told my parents, there was almost a gasp (certainly there was a widening of the eyes), and my Mum looked at my wife and said "I suppose I should hug you now", and gave a very lukewarm standoffish sort of hug. My wife was very hurt by this - even though on paper it all sounds very innocuous - I think because it demonstrates a deeper disrespect. I don't quite know why religious parents feel this way, perhaps it's the old "but that means they had sex!" hang-up...

I have defend Feardorcha here, when I started I use to debate with christians on YT, but after a while decided there were better things to be doing. The way I see Atheist is akin to the

Atheists are discriminated against by state-law, living in an accepted god-given-right christian-mind-set society that allows inequality and with what I also see as physiological abuse of non-religious parents/children. Do they accept it and lie low or face being osterised by schools/family & neighbours.
-sounds like physiological abuse, but
depending on the circumstances, hopefully then the best course of action or compromise can be taken.

Many of us had to face occasions, where we've had to choose; either an atheist or christian pathway. Basically I have one life and have no time to pretend to be submissive to someone's fantasies.

Flower, that fellow doesn't sound like he deserves to be called your childs grandfather.

aZerogodist.

That is a very bitter post. So, you have no sympathy or understanding for people who may have rejected Religion intellectually but find it hard to break from the conditioning of a religious upbringing? That is extraordinarily hard-hearted. I really cant find any common ground with some of these absolutist views and frankly, they depress me. Think I'll retreat out of this group, it's a downer. Some nice folks here but some of you guys need to get a heart.

Cheerio

It is not about having a heart it is about that non-religious people are the second largest group in Ireland but yet they cannot become a teacher, president, soldier etc with out having to pretend to be catholic.

But people on this forum need to get a heart?

I think that's very childish and petulant of you Wexfordhobbit.

Just because you don't like somebody else's perspective you go flouncing off in a great huff... Not everyone here is the same as each other - are you perhaps stereotyping atheists as being alike? I don't agree with everyone on here either, but then if I did it would be a very boring place! If you've got an issue with aZerogodist's post then it might be more constructive to address the points raised rather than just dismissing them as "depressing". As it stands I haven't a clue why you have a problem with it.

I'm not sure what you're looking for but if you're expecting to find a place where everyone agrees with you and there is no dissenting opinion then you may find better solace here:

http://irishcatholics.proboards.com/index.cgi

Not petulant at all. Rational decision not to be bombarded with whiney negativity and confrontational attitudes. Its not healthy.

Both Flower and Wexfordhobbit are asking for special consideration for their views with the demand that others don't hurt their feelings.
I've had a bad day or my relative is bullying me and you should be nice to me and not be a hard-hearted atheist.
Ignoring the claim that only religious believers have feelings, this is the same argument as religions demanding 'respect'. As a civilised person, I respect the feelings of others and never go out of my way to give offence but in a country where my views are not respected, and after a lifetime of abuse and discrimination for standing up for the right not to believe in nonsense, why should I capitulate on the one forum where I can freely express my views?
My arguments against the nonsense of Protestant baptism are just that - nothing to do with the poster. Atheists in Ireland are very slowly coming into the light and demanding their equal civil rights. We should not be silenced by accusations of being hard-hearted or extreme or fundamentalist or new or uncaring.
I'm going to go now and buy sweets for the puppy.

I think you should see my previous post, where I agree with Flower's compromise for an alternative christening.

Also my post to Dr.Raskolnikov's topic, (being a bad atheist) before making an incorrect judgement and sending me to the gallows.

Note my last post is just to explain why someone may appear as you put it 'a fundamental atheist'. (tad of an insulting term ??)

Debating and communicating is part of any Forum, and to vary/expand one's opinion, I have seen threads where an OP is dead-fast against something, and in the end can understand the otherside's point of view or even completly reversed it.

Even if you do find objectional views by members on the forum, isn't that more of a reason to challenge those posts and at least dent the shape of the group, before retreating back to middle-earth.

I don't know if you ever saw that video on Youtube, an analogy of getting atheists/independent thinkers to work together is like being a cat-herder. (look up herding cats on YT)

To start, a forum where everyone agrees with each other would just be a circle-jerk for egotists. No thanks.

Second, I don't think that aZerogodist has demonstrated any "absolutist views". And even if he did, he's one member of the forum.

I don't think anybody's choices here are made out of hard-heartedness - though, in this world, sometimes you have to be hard-hearted. It's a difficult society to live in. Everyone is here because they're making some kind of stand. Wexfordhobbit, you don't want your child exposed to religion in school, and if I recall correctly, were quite fiercely unhappy with the circumstances at your child's school and want to take steps to prevent any more issues in future. For most people here, christening a child because it's easier is no different than allowing your child to be taught religion because it's easier.

Everyone has the right to decide how much they're willing to take. I personally feel resentful to "lapsed Catholics" who have no belief in God whatsoever but go to Church, take part in religious sacraments, and allow their children to have a religious upbringing, because "that's just what you do". In my opinion, it's these people that are hindering social progress moreso than the people with genuine beliefs.

Is it hard-hearted of me to judge them for wanting an easy life, for not caring enough to cut ties with the Church? Is it hard-hearted of those who would judge you for making a fuss about your child's religious education? Is it hard-hearted of those who disapprove of Flower's choice?

It's not hard-heartedness, it's a subjective scale of principle.

For me, I don't approve of christening children to make others happy. But I personally think Flower's circumstances sound impossible. As far as I'm aware, she has no support network of her own close by and so it's mainly her boyfriend's family she might have to rely on in an emergency. Sometimes keeping the peace is as important as keeping your principles, and she went far out of her way to keep as much of both as possible.

Neither of our children have been christened. However, my wife and I both see real value in ceremony. For thousands of years, humans have had various 'coming of age' ceremonies and introducing a new child into his/her extended family is just one of them.

Our eldest had a beautiful naming ceremony with friends and family. Unfortunately, the youngest is still waiting, because one set of grandparents live halfway around the world and are due to visit next summer. We see little value in holding a naming ceremony without a gathering of both sides of the family.

Interesting point Puck. The Rite of Baptism has often been performed in secret, as the Church allows anyone at all (you don't have to be an ordained priest) to baptise a child - the point being solely to save the child's sole from Limbo. A good secular ceremony should be rooted in celebrating the life of the new person in the presence of those nearest and dearest to the parents.

And don't say Limbo has been abolished; there was a doctrinal review panel which recommended that it is theologically undesirable that dead children would be denied the presence of God. This has not yet been officially invoked as canon law.

There is a legal point at which a new person is named. As I recall a nurse goes around the maternity ward with the State papers and the mammies sign up the new arrivals. Maybe this could be made into something more ceremonial.

In the pubs near the maternity hospitals, new daddies are to be found "wettin' the new baby's head".

Currently, it is up to the parents to register the child within (I think) three months at their local social welfare office. There's nothing ceremonial about it, it's just dealing with a low-end civil servant through a pane of glass.