Atheism

[Quake42]

Firstly, the fact that you, I and everyone here are discussing tax payers money being spent on faith schools surely indicates the established church has SOME sort of effect on our day to day lives.

But faith schools aren't the preserve of the established Church, are they? I don't have any official figures but based on my own childhood I would say that Catholic schools are far more numerous.

Secondly, as for it being a pretty benign institution, I think you are calling it benign in relation to what it once was.

To some extent, but also the CoE's actions and public pronouncements these days are pretty inoffensive. It's hard to imagine the Archbishop of Canterbury calling for the execution of apostates, for example. It's hard to get terribly excited about a body that basically says "let's be nice to one another" and gets its clerics to officiate at marriages and funerals.

 

[stu neville]

Quick point about faith schools - my son attends a C of E secondary, which in its original form was founded 400 years ago by the church to which it is still directly associated, and TBH the faith side of it is played down. They have a compulsory morning service (pupils of other faiths - of which there are a number - excused), but that's about it. Religion has absolutely no influence on the academic side of things, and they take pains to make sure that R.E. is strictly balanced and gives all major faiths equal coverage.

There are lots of extra-curricular faith-related activities - but these are entirely optional. I know some schools are more hardline, but working in tertiary ed I see a lot of kids from all different flavours of school and most that come from faith schools are little different to those who went to state comps or indeed public schools.

If a school works, the results are good and the kids and staff are (by and large) happy, let em get on with it .

 

[Quake42]

Quick point about faith schools - my son attends a C of E secondary, which in its original form was founded 400 years ago by the church to which it is still directly associated, and TBH the faith side of it is played down. They have a compulsory morning service (pupils of other faiths - of which there are a number - excused), but that's about it. Religion has absolutely no influence on the academic side of things, and they take pains to make sure that R.E. is strictly balanced and gives all major faiths equal coverage.

Which all sounds reasonable, but I wonder if you could say the same about a Wahabbi-funded Muslim school, or a Jesuit-run Catholic establishment. The Catholic schools near where I grew up were notorious for teaching their students little more than church doctrine.

We're a small island and there is already too much division here. Separating kids from their peers of different faiths is not the way to increase harmony. If parents want to send their kids to Sunday school or whatever, that's a matter for them. Keep it out of their day to day education though.

 

[stu neville]

..which is why I made the point about other schools being more hard-line. I think the point I was making was that it's disingenuous to treat all faith schools as the same, or indeed even schools run by differing denominations of the same titular faith.

 

[linesmachine]

To some extent, but also the CoE's actions and public pronouncements these days are pretty inoffensive. It's hard to imagine the Archbishop of Canterbury calling for the execution of apostates, for example. It's hard to get terribly excited about a body that basically says "let's be nice to one another" and gets its clerics to officiate at marriages and funerals.

It's not about that, it's about the people making decisions sharing a common ground. I'll give you a (all be it limited) example. I live in Oxford. Magdalen College is a private school. It has the highest take up of A Level students in the world entering Oxbridge. Which might make you think it's A Level results are the best in the world. But no, they are good but not even top 25 in the UK. It's the relationship they hold with an educational institution that still retains a Church tradition ethos similar to their own. It's no wonder there are a higher proportion of Church goers in the highest echelons of this country's political scene than in your average population sample.

The Church has power, no in the "cut off their heads" sense but in a much more subtle way. A cultural, society way.

 

[ramonmercado]

..which is why I made the point about other schools being more hard-line. I think the point I was making was that it's disingenuous to treat all faith schools as the same, or indeed even schools run by differing denominations of the same titular faith.

In the south of Ireland CoI & Presbyterian schools are much sought after. Obviously they give priority to their own faiths. The ethos is more welcoming and religion doesn't permeate the cuuriculum. There are a couple of exceptions to this, mostly fee paying boarding schools.

 

[linesmachine]

The more I think about this the more I think it's a very "difficult" topic for discussion. My wife and I are going to have to start thinking about local schools at some point and I was surprised to learn that the local Catholic Secondary receives as much as 30% ON TOP of it's state receipts through fund raising and "legacy" from friends of the school. The group responsible for creating these funds are a Catholic group (although you do not have to be Catholic yourself to join them) and they run the show like a business. The school guarantees it does no more religious pushing than a short bible story during assembly on a Friday but does OFFER huge amounts of church based extra curicular stuff. The school has benfitted from brand new sports equipment, a new theatre and it's own (small) swimming pool for the lower year groups.

Now the question in my mind is this. If you put a kid in this environment I fail to she how he/she will not come out of school with at least a positive impression of Catholicism, furthermore he/she WILL mix with Catholic kids and be impressioned by them. So is it therefore wrong for me to allow my child to enjoy the benefits of this situation AND be influenced for life? I am not a believer myself, but neither am I an atheist, but I am principled and it does sit awkwardly with me.

 

[Fats_Tuesday]

If I was in your boat linesmachine, I'd happily play the system - I'd take advantage of the school, but I'd clearly explain to my kid what the church itself is doing with these schools, i.e. using them in their indoctrination practices. As long as your kid has a sensible counterpoint at home in the form of you, I would think it unlikely the indoctrination will be effective; I just pity some of the other poor souls that are sent there, who may not have such a counterbalance.

 

[ramonmercado]

Franco lives.

Spanish atheist march banned in Easter Week
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13158138

Roman Catholic clergy attend a papal Mass in St Peter's Basilica, Vatican City, 21 April Catholics, like these at St Peter's in Rome, are celebrating Maundy Thursday

Related Stories

* 'Arson attack' on Sagrada Familia
* Country profile

A Spanish court has banned an atheists' group from marching through the capital Madrid as the city's Catholics celebrate Easter Week.

The Madrid superior court of justice upheld a ban imposed last week by the Madrid region authorities, who had argued the march could provoke clashes.

One of the march's organisers said the ban showed there was no separation of Church and state in Spain.

The march would have coincided with Maundy Thursday religious processions.

Imposing the original ban, the Madrid region interior ministry noted the route of the proposed march through the capital's Lavapies district would pass by several Catholic churches.

It argued that clashes might break out with conservative Catholics.

Another reason given for banning the march was the appearance of lewd promotional posters for the event that bore slogans such as the "fraternity of saint paedophilia", the Spanish newspaper El Pais reports.

However, organisers of the march repeatedly disassociated themselves from the posters.

Luis Vega, president of the Madrileno Association of Atheists and Freethinkers, called the ban "worrying" and "a step back to the beginning of the transition [to democracy from the Franco years] for the country".

 

[linesmachine]

As long as your kid has a sensible counterpoint at home in the form of you...

I'll just have to stop you there Fats! My wife would mention at this point that I had to be rescued by a neighbour yesterday after getting stuck in a hedge. I was reaching for some litter that a yuuf had dropped and, well gravity intervened and I couldn't get back out without assistance

But in all seriousness, although I'm principled I'm also sensible (ignoring the hedge incident) and I reckon we are confronted with suggestion from all directions these days from the media to the politics to our friends. I just wonder if a constant 7 year educational environment during important ages is somehow very different.

 

[Fats_Tuesday]

Tricky call - if it was me, I'd be confident that I could explain clearly to my child exactly what was going on and what parts of the school experience were indoctination. I think a good dose of reason should be reasonable medicine. If there started to be issues with the school pushing it, I'd withdraw them.

It's a particularly tricky one with catholic schools though, as at least in my day, they really did hammer home the religion quite brutally, and were extremely strict, including much more frequent use of corporal punishment for misdemeanours where most sane people would find such punishment unacceptable. Many fewer of my atheist friends are ex-catholic compared to ex-protestant, probably due to the viciousness of their school indoctrination (at least back in the 1980s).

 

[linesmachine]

Firstly, instead of having a hundred odd pages of posts maybe we should start new threads more often! Maybe Atheism deserves it's own title thread!

Secondly, I reckon the dangers of putting a child in a religious "themed" school are more about the longevity (typically 7 years), type of environment (educational) and the fact that teachers are essentially parents of a sort. Would I not find myself contradicting an adult figure whom I would like to think my child would respect?

The school I was talking about state they do not employ teachers on a religious basis....but how practical is that as a truth? Aren't Catholic teachers drawn to the school? Aren't they employed just as much to teach as to facilitate extra curricular activities (which would often be Catholic based?). Would a non believer like myself WORK at a Catholic school?

It's all such a theoretical head fxck that I find myself going round in circles.

 

[Mythopoeika]

I wouldn't worry overly much about sending my kids (if I had any) to a C of E school.
They're normally pretty relaxed and don't usually push the religion that much. Back in my day, they just forced us to attend a morning service - but that was as far as it went.
As for sending kids to other types of faith-based schools - I just wouldn't go there (or rather, my hypothetical kids wouldn't).

 

[rynner2]

Listening to 'Just A Minute' on iPlayer:

Graham Norton offers this, on Epitaphs:
"Here lies an atheist - all dressed up and nowhwere to go"!

(But of course we can't be sure of that! )

 

[Dr_Baltar]

..which is why I made the point about other schools being more hard-line. I think the point I was making was that it's disingenuous to treat all faith schools as the same, or indeed even schools run by differing denominations of the same titular faith.

On the contrary, I think it's completely fair to treat all faith schools as the same, as in, none of them should exist.

 

[Ravenstone]

Now the question in my mind is this. If you put a kid in this environment I fail to she how he/she will not come out of school with at least a positive impression of Catholicism, furthermore he/she WILL mix with Catholic kids and be impressioned by them. So is it therefore wrong for me to allow my child to enjoy the benefits of this situation AND be influenced for life?

You need to talk to people who actually attended Catholic schools. I did. Primary and Comprehensive. Trust me - it does not give a positive impression to live in that environment for any length of time. You see it, warts and all. The only possible positive impression is from the outside looking in.

Having said that, I don't see anything wrong with any denominational school. In fact, when I went to school, the Catholic schools consistently out-performed the State ones.

And they weren't particularly bothered by my (at times obvious) interest in the occult. To be perfectly honest, I learned far more about Bible study and catechism on my own than I ever did at school.

 

[tamyu]

I also attended a Catholic school, from Kindergarten through the first year of high school. An excellent education, all in all.

Looking back on it now, I think that I actually received an incredibly balanced education about religions. Not just Catholicism, or even Christianity. As religion wasn`t a taboo subject at all, we were free to have classes on the history of religions around the world, on different religions, etc. In the schools I attended the ultimate goal was to get you to choose Catholicism over the other options... But you needed to know the other options before you could make a choice.

I am sure some of that sparked my interest in not just the occult, but in history and anthropology. All together a good thing, in my opinion.

Anyway - I came from a Catholic family, went through the Catholic school system, and still ended up anything but Catholic. The only thing I can say I took away from it that was "religious" would be a fairly decent knowledge of the bible... But that alone doesn`t push anyone to believe in it.

The only reason I would balk at sending a child to a religious school would be the feeling of uncomfortableness that I would experience in the very beginning before they`re old enough to distinguish between what is religious and what is not. But that period ends quite quickly - much faster than you`d expect if you have someone who can point it out.

 

[Ravenstone]

The only reason I would balk at sending a child to a religious school would be the feeling of uncomfortableness that I would experience in the very beginning before they`re old enough to distinguish between what is religious and what is not.

And yet, both of us went through Catholic schools, with devout Catholic families, and came out the other side being something else.

Although I'm always a little vague about my own belief system.

I think some parents sometimes underestimate their children. They're not as likely to get brainwashed as they seem to think.

 

[Quake42]

On the contrary, I think it's completely fair to treat all faith schools as the same, as in, none of them should exist.

Perhaps, but I think it is true to say that there is a world of difference between a longstanding CoE school which limits the religious element to nativity plays and assemblies with a broad Christian theme on the one hand, and a fundamentalist place which teaches creationism or forces girls to wear niqabs on the other. I'm not sure that a ban on the latter necessarily means tearing down the other. I'm not sure how this could be done in principle: perhaps say that no new faith schools will be registered, but those already in existence can continue provided the religious angle is kept to a minimum.

 

[Analis]

Just a last answer, before it derails the thread.

I suspect it is because many different kinds of people are motivated to do such things by other forces and the idea of the "reliable witness" is questionable.

No, people with honorable backgrounds are not always reliable. But it's not a great discovery. How many of them are crooks ?

Not sure if we can move this topic to another thread, but that slightly misses my point - he hoped not to get caught, yes - but he was still somehow motivated in the first place to perpetrate a hoax that would potentially bring him to ridicule if exposed; why?

Because that's what he was : a crook, pure and simple. Fame and money seeker. Swindlers face much more than ridicule, but they take the risks.

 

[Dr_Baltar]

On the contrary, I think it's completely fair to treat all faith schools as the same, as in, none of them should exist.

Perhaps, but I think it is true to say that there is a world of difference between a longstanding CoE school which limits the religious element to nativity plays and assemblies with a broad Christian theme on the one hand, and a fundamentalist place which teaches creationism or forces girls to wear niqabs on the other. I'm not sure that a ban on the latter necessarily means tearing down the other. I'm not sure how this could be done in principle: perhaps say that no new faith schools will be registered, but those already in existence can continue provided the religious angle is kept to a minimum.

I'm not sure how it could be done either. However, as has been suggested by others, mainstream faith acts as cover for more radical or fundamentalist flavours. As long as we allow one religion access to running educational establishments, it makes it that much harder to justify excluding others. All should be treated equally; all should be excluded.

 

[ramonmercado]

More than 20 percent of atheist scientists are spiritual
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-05-per ... itual.html
May 5th, 2011 in Other Sciences / Social Sciences

More than 20 percent of atheist scientists are spiritual, according to new research from Rice University. Though the general public marries spirituality and religion, the study found that spirituality is a separate idea – one that more closely aligns with scientific discovery – for "spiritual atheist" scientists.

The research will be published in the June issue of Sociology of Religion.

Through in-depth interviews with 275 natural and social scientists at elite universities, the Rice researchers found that 72 of the scientists said they have a spirituality that is consistent with science, although they are not formally religious.

"Our results show that scientists hold religion and spirituality as being qualitatively different kinds of constructs," said Elaine Howard Ecklund, assistant professor of sociology at Rice and lead author of the study. "These spiritual atheist scientists are seeking a core sense of truth through spirituality -- one that is generated by and consistent with the work they do as scientists."

For example, these scientists see both science and spirituality as "meaning-making without faith" and as an individual quest for meaning that can never be final. According to the research, they find spirituality congruent with science and separate from religion, because of that quest; where spirituality is open to a scientific journey, religion requires buying into an absolute "absence of empirical evidence."

"There's spirituality among even the most secular scientists," Ecklund said. "Spirituality pervades both the religious and atheist thought. It's not an either/or. This challenges the idea that scientists, and other groups we typically deem as secular, are devoid of those big 'Why am I here?' questions. They too have these basic human questions and a desire to find meaning."

Ecklund co-authored the study with Elizabeth Long, professor and chair of the Department of Sociology at Rice. In their analysis of the 275 interviews, they discovered that the terms scientists most used to describe religion included "organized, communal, unified and collective." The set of terms used to describe spirituality include "individual, personal and personally constructed." All of the respondents who used collective or individual terms attributed the collective terms to religion and the individual terms to spirituality.

"While the data indicate that spirituality is mainly an individual pursuit for academic scientists, it is not individualistic in the classic sense of making them more focused on themselves," said Ecklund, director of the Religion and Public Life Program at Rice. "In their sense of things, being spiritual motivates them to provide help for others, and it redirects the ways in which they think about and do their work as scientists."

Ecklund and Long noted that the spiritual scientists saw boundaries between themselves and their nonspiritual colleagues because their spirituality facilitated engagement with the world around them. Such engagement, according to the spiritual scientists, generated a different approach to research and teaching: While nonspiritual colleagues might focus on their own research at the expense of student interaction, spiritual scientists' sense of spiritualty provides nonnegotiable reasons for making sure that they help struggling students succeed.

Provided by Rice University

 

[Jerry_B]

Ecklund and Long noted that the spiritual scientists saw boundaries between themselves and their nonspiritual colleagues because their spirituality facilitated engagement with the world around them. Such engagement, according to the spiritual scientists, generated a different approach to research and teaching: While nonspiritual colleagues might focus on their own research at the expense of student interaction, spiritual scientists' sense of spiritualty provides nonnegotiable reasons for making sure that they help struggling students succeed.

Odd, but maybe just academic back-biting. Such things happen

 

[rynner2]

Frankly, you can't comprehend the immensity of the universe, or the complexities of string theory and quantum physics, without some sense of awe that has nothing to do with organised religion.

If you call that 'spirituality', then I too am a spiritual scientist.

 

[Mythopoeika]

That's right. The more you understand about the universe, the more awesome it becomes.

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

But, it don't mean a thing, if it ain't got that swing.

 

[Mythopoeika]

But, it don't mean a thing, if it ain't got that swing.

doo-wab-di-wab doo-wab-di-wab doo-wab-di-wab doo-wab-di-wah?

 

[ramonmercado]

Bacik warns atheist convention of 'creeping fundamentalism in Irish life'
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ire ... 88221.html
PATSY McGARRY, Religious Affairs Correspondent

Sat, Jun 04, 2011

LABOUR PARTY Senator Ivana Bacik warned in Dublin last night of “a creeping fundamentalism in Irish life” which was “a real problem we have”.

She would approve, she said, a ban on genital mutilation of males in Ireland. Last Thursday she received unanimous support in the Seanad for her proposals to ban female genital mutilation in Ireland. The “creeping fundamentalism” she referred to was evident in the US, she said, but in Ireland it was “perhaps more sophisticated, where columnists talk of choice, yet oppose change where Catholic schools are concerned”, she said.

She cited the introduction by the previous government of new blasphemy legislation, a move akin to that praised in Pakistan as a victory for the fundamentalist lobby.

Ms Bacik was speaking at the first World Atheist Convention in Ireland, which began in Dublin yesterday and continues through the weekend. Organised by Atheist Ireland, on Sunday it will discuss and adapt the Dublin Declaration on Religion in Public Life.

Presenting herself as “the only ‘out’ atheist in the Oireachtas”, the Senator knew “quite a few others who were either atheist or agnostic”, but who remain “in the closet for now”. What she and others in Atheist Ireland sought was “a modern secular Republic where religions thrive side by side, with no dominant religion”.

As with the Swedish saying, it would be a place where “in school you teach, in church you preach”, she said. “In Ireland we have far too much preaching in school,” she said.

She said atheism was “profoundly moral. Its central tenet is respect for others’ beliefs, with an emphasis on combining reason and compassion. Ground rules for human behaviour are not just the construct of religion,” she said.

Commenting that in Ireland “we live in remarkable times”, she said “all our gods have crumbled . . . sacred texts, infallible truths have been exposed as shams”. She was struck by the “comparison between the unquestioning deference shown to bankers, developers, and economic authorities with that shown to religious authority” in Ireland.

Irish people were “too slow to challenge orthodoxy, not quick enough to question”.

In a panel discussion later on “Weird Science versus Weird Religion”, renowned atheist Prof Richard Dawkins said scientists were “not authority figures. They use a method. It’s the best method we’ve got of getting at the truth, even if it’s not perfect.”

Science does make mistakes, he said, adding that “if science can’t get at the truth, nothing else can”. It had “mystery and magic of its own. Scientists love mystery. It’s a challenge to solve, and opens the curtains to yet more mysteries which are as tantalising and mysterious.”

Quantum theory was “deeply mysterious, beyond the impoverished imaginings of any theologian, or of eastern mysticism”.

Predictions of Quantum theory “could be made to the smallest number of decimal places, and was almost certain to be right. There was “no such data on any theological claims made”, he said.

 

[ramonmercado]

Full text at link.

Our 256,000 (and counting) atheists, agnostics, humanists and non-religious
Sat, Jun 04, 2011

The ‘non-religious’ are the largest group in the State after Catholics, according to the last census. They range from active atheists lobbying for a secular Ireland to guilty non-believers who still observe religious rituals, writes RÓISÍN INGLE


A FEW WEEKS ago Brian Whiteside of the Humanist Association of Ireland addressed a gathering that included Taoiseach Enda Kenny, Minister for Justice Alan Shatter as well as various religious leaders. He used the opportunity to raise the issue of our religious presidential oath, which he says is just one example of State discrimination against the growing godless community.

The oath, the wording of which is enshrined in the Constitution, is taken in “the presence of Almighty God” and is a non-negotiable promise that must be given by whoever is elected president. It concludes, “May God direct and sustain me.”

“I talked about how embarrassing it would be for this country if a successful candidate decided that in all conscience they couldn’t give that oath because they didn’t believe in God,” says Whiteside. He was gratified to observe Kenny requesting that Shatter make a note of this potentially awkward eventuality.

It’s a possibility worth reflecting on, given that there is more chance of a non-believer being elected president now than any other time in the history of the State. In the 2006 census, more than 186,000 people ticked the No Religion box, an increase of 34.6 per cent on 2002. That makes it is the second-largest census grouping after Roman Catholic. There are more agnostics, humanists, atheists and non-religious in Ireland than there are Church of Ireland members, Presbyterians, Orthodox Christians and Methodists combined. A further 70,000 opted not to answer the religion question. Coming in the wake of the Murphy and Ryan reports, the 2011 census results are expected to record a further increase in this disparate but essentially non-religious group.

This weekend in Dublin about 350 atheists have gathered for the first World Atheist Convention to be held in this country. Speakers include the prolific British professor Richard Dawkins and the chairman of Atheist Ireland, Michael Nugent. “Twenty years ago the atheist campaign would have been around trying to change public opinion, and now it is much more about getting politicians and institutions of the State to recognise that public opinion has changed,” says Nugent.

While some people who wear their atheism on their sleeves still risk clashing with more religious family members or friends, declining to have your children baptised or choosing a civil ceremony instead of a church marriage is a less controversial choice than ever before.

There is also wide acceptance that religious involvement in education in this country needs to be addressed. One of Ruairí Quinn’s first acts on becoming Minister for Education was setting up a forum on patronage and management of schools, a move supported by leaders of the Catholic Church, which has a role in more than 90 per cent of Irish primary schools.

These days, says Nugent, it’s the layer of “background religious noise” lobbyists such as him are fighting. The group has 450 fully paid-up members and 2,000 registered members. “We have two aims: to promote atheism and reason over superstition and supernaturalism, and to promote an ethical and secular Ireland where the State does not give special treatment to any religion.”

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/wee ... 66216.html

 

[OneWingedBird]

She would approve, she said, a ban on genital mutilation of males in Ireland. Last Thursday she received unanimous support in the Seanad for her proposals to ban female genital mutilation in Ireland.

Maybe i've missed the context here, but I wasn't aware Catholisism supported that kind of thing? Or is she talking about other kinds of religious fundmentalism also just not by name?