How long before leading politicans can admit to being atheist ?

Rabidlamb

I applaud the likes of Ruairi Quinn but he is the exception.
Even in today's Ireland it's difficult to see any party nominating a leader who doesn't openly display a strong faith.
Will there come a time to switch when the secular population outnumber the god botherers ?.

Politicans for all their failings seem like an intelligent bunch so there must be many still in the closet on this issue.
I imagine leaders like Obama saying "god bless America" with a tongue in his cheek.

partyatmygaff

lol

bullpost

I thought a fair few had come out of the closet in recent times?

wild_cat

Gilmore is pretty much an atheist but I think he says something along the lines of "faith is a personal matter".


They had a clip on RTE during the elections where someone got a special needs kid to go up and ask Gilmore that question.

If I was in politics myself i'd be shouting about being an atheist louder than any catholic lobby group. I'd make sure to run in a non backward part of the country though...

Aldebaran

Eamon Gilmore is an atheist, isn't he?

mikemac

Bertie Ahern was seperated and living with another woman. And took criticism from his next door neighbor in Drumcondra Archbishop Connell. He is a cardinal now

It's not the same as being an athiest and certainly the voters didn't care but it is ignoring the Archbishop

Needler

Atheist forum that a way

---

>

_feedback_

There are a select few topics, that, no matter what way you approach them, will always have the same result in AH.

All this thread needs now is a holy joe to arrive, aaaaand action.

smk89

I'd say wait until all the old dears die, so about 10-20 years.

Rothmans

Was George Clemenceau, the PM of France during WW1 not openly an atheist?

Just googled it there. Yup, he was an atheist. This is almost 100 years ago now.

biko

From After Hours.

Bloody Nipples

Well according to the last census there were 105,000 atheists in a population of 3.7m. This works out at 2.8% of the population. Going by that reckoning, and making the assumption that the Dáil is representative of the rest of the population then you'd only have about 4 non-religious TDs anyway.

I'd heard that Gilmore had said he was an atheist on Pat Kenny's radio show at around Christmas time though I may be misremembering. I like how a candidate's religious views don't really come under much scrutiny here in the same way they do stateside, though that might be down to the electorate just assuming everyone is Catholic :P

token56

When the general public's opinion on atheists/agnostics is a bit more relaxed also taking all the religious elements out of the constitution would be nice for those non-religious politicians.

For example

In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom
is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all
actions both of men and States must be referred,
We, the people of Éire,
Humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our
Divine Lord, Jesus Christ, Who sustained our
fathers through centuries of trial,
Gratefully remembering their heroic and
unremitting struggle to regain the rightful
independence of our Nation,
And seeking to promote the common good, with
due observance of Prudence, Justice and Charity,
so that the dignity and freedom of the individual
may be assured, true social order attained, the
unity of our country restored, and concord
established with other nations,
Do hereby adopt, enact, and give to ourselves this
Constitution.

and for any budding presidents

"In the presence of Almighty God I ,do
solemnly and sincerely promise and declare
that I will maintain the Constitution of
Ireland and uphold its laws, that I will fulfil
my duties faithfully and conscientiously in
accordance with the Constitution and the
law, and that I will dedicate my abilities to
the service and welfare of the people of
Ireland. May God direct and sustain me.

Sarky

The start of the constitution is awfully whiny. All it's missing is "AND DE SHPUDS WERE BLACK IN DE GROUND!"

Bloody Nipples

Twas a different age.

Turtwig

In another generation's time it won't be an issue here in Ireland. In the U.S though I think it's akin to political suicide.

wnolan1992

It'll be about another 50 I think, until the last of the 50's and 60's crowd are gone.

I still get a little angry at things like the prayers at the start of Dail sittings. I've nothing against people who're religious but it shouldn't be an issue when deciding who's going to be dealing with your country's affairs.

I've a feeling though that politicians in Ireland will be freer to be honest than those in the USA (ironic, seeing as they claim to be the cultural hub of the world no? ) because there are far less fundamentalists here. Most religious people here are fairly reasonable in my experience when it comes to issues like this.

axer

Isn't the point of the likes of David Quinn that they want to give some schools to the state so that they can have some stricter catholic schools - will we just end up creating fundamentalist christians/catholics by condensing their numbers? Thus will we end up more like the USA in the long run?

wnolan1992

axer wrote: »

Isn't the point of the likes of David Quinn that they want to give some schools to the state so that they can have some stricter catholic schools - will we just end up creating fundamentalist christians/catholics by condensing their numbers? Thus will we end up more like the USA in the long run?

Christ I hope not..... (bad choice of words perhaps)....
But now that you say it, I can see it happening...man, all we need now is some creationists to come out and demand Genisis be taught in all schools.

Turtwig

axer wrote: »

Isn't the point of the likes of David Quinn that they want to give some schools to the state so that they can have some stricter catholic schools - will we just end up creating fundamentalist christians/catholics by condensing their numbers? Thus will we end up more like the USA in the long run?

It does pave the way a bit for it but then again our immigration rates are nothing like those in the U.S. The only reason there is a projected growth in the number of religious adherents in the U.S is because the number of people leaving the various churches is vastly eclipses by those immigrating into the U.S. The Daily Show by Jon Stewart has more viewers than any show on Fox News. That my friend is hope.

I'm no holy Joe, but I question this being in After Hours.

Is After hours becoming Atheism & Agnosticism by the back door?

Anyways, I agreewith Gilmore that it's a personal matter, one of *the* most personal matters that concerns a human on this earth. I *never* judge a person by what he believes in, only how he acts.

Religion is of no consequence to who I vote for, and nor should it be anyone's.

Turtwig

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm no holy Joe, but I question this being in After Hours.

Is After hours becoming Atheism & Agnosticism by the back door?

Anyways, I agreewith Gilmore that it's a personal matter, one of *the* most personal matters that concerns a human on this earth. I *never* judge a person by what he believes in, only how he acts.

Religion is of no consequence to who I vote for, and nor should it be anyone's.

wnolan1992

exactly SeaSlacker. Religion is a personal choice, and should bear no significance in politics.

strobe

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm no holy Joe, but I question this being in After Hours.

I'm no moldy Rose, but I question you constantly posting in threads in After Hours just to tell people how you have no interest in posting in them. Apparently there are 'militant religious' and 'militant atheists', but I bet neither of them find each other anywhere near as pathetically annoying as the 'militant "I don't want to talk about this in case my feelings get hurt, so you all stop too" mother fukking whinge bags'.

Dades

Deleted User wrote: »

Anyways, I agree with Gilmore that it's a personal matter, one of *the* most personal matters that concerns a human on this earth.

If only this were the reality.

AhSureTisGrand

wnolan1992 wrote: »

exactly SeaSlacker. Religion is a personal choice, and should bear no significance in politics.

So you would have no problems voting for a jihadist, as it's their personal choice?

wnolan1992

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

So you would have no problems voting for a jihadist, as it's their personal choice?

I might be wrong here (and if I am I apologise for my ignorance) but I though jihad was a radical belief of a minority of Muslims? And not actually a religious belief held by reasonable people. I know I'm making a hash of explaining what I mean here so I'll stop...

But to directly answer your question, yes I would have a problem, but I'm sure there are people out there that wouldn't. That's democracy.

AhSureTisGrand

wnolan1992 wrote: »

I might be wrong here (and if I am I apologise for my ignorance) but I though jihad was a radical belief of a minority of Muslims? And not actually a religious belief held by reasonable people. I know I'm making a hash of explaining what I mean here so I'll stop...

But to directly answer your question, yes I would have a problem, but I'm sure there are people out there that wouldn't. That's democracy.

So if you do find the religious beliefs of a person alarming, it will cause problems for you

Gregor Samsa

wnolan1992 wrote: »

man, all we need now is some creationists to come out and demand Genisis be taught in all schools.

By that stage, we'd be In Too Deep. Ireland would become a Land Of Confusion. We'd be Throwing It All Away if we were to teach our kids that some deity had an Invisible Touch in all of this.

Galvasean

Deleted User wrote: »

Is After hours becoming Atheism & Agnosticism by the back door?

That's how the heathens get ya

wnolan1992

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

So if you do find the religious beliefs of a person alarming, it will cause problems for you

To be honest, I don't know.

I'll just take the example of Jihadism to try and explain what I'm thinking ("try" being the operative word).
Let's say for argument's sake, that Politician X is the best qualified person for the Finance portfolio, and is a jihadist. Politician Y is not quiet as qualified and is an Atheist.
Now, if I had confidence in X, that he/she would not let their own personal religious beliefs interfere with how they were to handle the Finance job, then I'd like to think I'd vote for them over Y.

But, this is just a naive idealistic view on the world I know.


I'm sorry if this doesn't make much sense, I'm kinda wrestling two sides of myself here.