Less than 1,000 atheists in Ireland

[DOD]

I had thought my parents well knew I wouldn't want to be counted a catholic even though I'd never spoken of it.

Yeah, my mother put down catholic for me in 2001. I genuinely can't remember what happened with the last one, I was in my sister's and filled out my own details, but I'm not sure if the religion question was on the section for people not normally present. If it was, then I would have put down Atheist.

I'd say there's more than 929 atheists in Clonakilty, not to mind Ireland. A lot of people put down Catholic instinctively, a bit like the way i say thank God all the time, even though I don't believe in him.

[Pig Destroyer]

But are they protestant atheists or catholic atheists?

These statistics refer to the 26 counties in which that distinction thankfully doesn't really matter.

[secularireland]

According to the census figures there are only 929 atheists in the State. Yet we hear calls all the time for the religious ethos of schools, hospitals etc. to be removed so as not to offent atheists!

No religion and not stated is the largest group behind Catholics (even before we count the Jedi!)

And we live in a country with no state religion, which means that no religion should be given government preference. If you don't like that get the constitution changed to include Catholicism.

http://www.cso.ie/statistics/popnclassb ... ty2006.htm

[secularireland]

According to the census figures there are only 929 atheists in the State. Yet we hear calls all the time for the religious ethos of schools, hospitals etc. to be removed so as not to offent atheists!

And of course, what about offending all the other religious groups beside Catholicism?

[DOD]

According to the census figures there are only 929 atheists in the State. Yet we hear calls all the time for the religious ethos of schools, hospitals etc. to be removed so as not to offent atheists!

Do you not think it is totally inappropriate for state institutions to have a built in religious ethos? The thing is with secularism that the child is not told that religion is nonsense, they just don't have it force fed to them. It is up to the parents if they wish to bring their children up in a certain faith.

[ibis]

Jedi for me as well!

Makes more sense than scientology

Let's face it, anything makes more sense than scientology!

With the possible exception of the OP's "atheist conspiracy theory".

[chiffon rouge]

Do you not think it is totally inappropriate for state institutions to have a built in religious ethos?

Absolutely.

[dubsthcentralboy]

According to the census figures there are only 929 atheists in the State. Yet we hear calls all the time for the religious ethos of schools, hospitals etc. to be removed so as not to offent atheists!

Do you not think it is totally inappropriate for state institutions to have a built in religious ethos? The thing is with secularism that the child is not told that religion is nonsense, they just don't have it force fed to them. It is up to the parents if they wish to bring their children up in a certain faith.

Well, I believe that the State needs to be pluralist. I have a problem with secularism in that it promotes the idea that religion is simply a private matter. Secularism is not value-neutral. I believe in pluralism, I think that people ought to be able to choose whether to be involved with an institution that has any ethos (so long as it does not damage the common good). The State should support and fund institutions (regardless of their ethos) that are providing apublic service (hospitals, schoold, pregnancy counselling agencies, marriage counselling services etc.)

Religion has a public as well as a private dimension. To remove the public expression of this is to limit the rights of the individual. I don't think that the State ought to favour one religion over another, but, not do I think the State should ignore the deep and honest desire of many people to have public services provided according to a particular ethos.

[lostexpectation]

http://www.cso.ie/statistics/popnclassb ... ty2006.htm[/url]

ah good point secular I forgot about that category, I applauded those who have the gumption to put down nonreligious, and who hopefully won't get married in church cos they want to see a pretty dress.

[chiffon rouge]

Well, I believe that the State needs to be pluralist. I have a problem with secularism in that it promotes the idea that religion is simply a private matter. Secularism is not value-neutral. I believe in pluralism, I think that people ought to be able to choose whether to be involved with an institution that has any ethos (so long as it does not damage the common good). The State should support and fund institutions (regardless of their ethos) that are providing apublic service (hospitals, schoold, pregnancy counselling agencies, marriage counselling services etc.)

Religion has a public as well as a private dimension. To remove the public expression of this is to limit the rights of the individual. I don't think that the State ought to favour one religion over another, but, not do I think the State should ignore the deep and honest desire of many people to have public services provided according to a particular ethos.

It is about rights.
No problem for the state to support different options, but the state first needs to guarantee, and have democratic control over, the service.