Athiests - Who cares

AudreyHepburn

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

In the same pedantic sense, you don't know for certain that jumping off a tall building will kill you - maybe angels will catch you.

It's not the way to bet, though.

Not even remotely comparable.

The massive number of poor souls who have taken their own lives by jumping from heights is proof that jumping from heights can and does kill.

There is no evidence either way on the existence, or not, of God. There is only belief and faith, or lack thereof.

kneemos

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

That you have that belief is a fact. But the belief itself is not a fact.

It's my actions that make my belief a fact,otherwise I wouldn't bother with the good deed and I'd have sex with the neighbour...ie God has an effect so must be real.

Dravokivich

One eyed Jack wrote: »

*The reason I used the term "non-religious" as opposed to "atheist" in this instance is because I often meet people who identify as "non-religious", but they seem to have an aversion almost to using the term "atheist" as if it carries negative connotations. I can understand why they'd avoid using the term myself, because in my opinion - Atheism has gotten a bad rap in the last couple of decades, partly due to some of it's more prominent publicity seekers who have run what I would consider a disastrous PR campaign. Meanwhile you have Frankie (Ratzinger was an awful hardliner) playing a PR storm with the "softly softly" approach that's far more appealing to the masses than the anti-theist negativity promoted by people like Richard Dawkins.

I'd agree with why you do that to be honest. I don't identify as atheit or whatever falls into that grouping as a mashup of Atheism/Agnosticism. Very little of it has to do with the negative perception of such a concept though. I've just got no interest in either Theism or Atheism. So I just answer all those questions as no.

It isn't a matter of sitting on the fence, in order to believe something, I feel some sort of interest needs to be held in it. My view isn't even on the absence of knowing the existence of a God or Gods either, as an interest is required in such learning too. :P

With no intention to insult, to me the whole thing is very similar to the Blur/Oasis debate of the mid '90's. Although I had an interest in that, I believed in Blur but I was young and dumb and preferred East17 :eek:. The moral of that story though, is just because you are presented with a question that has 2 answers, doesn't mean you need to pick one or the other.

Saralee4

Dravokivich wrote: »

With no intention to insult, to me the whole thing is very similar to the Blur/Oasis debate of the mid '90's. Although I had an interest in that, I believed in Blur but I was young and dumb and preferred East17 :eek:.

East17! Oh dear you really are messed up and confused

Dravokivich

Saralee4 wrote: »

East17! Oh dear you really are messed up and confused

No worries, sure everything turned out to be alright in the end.

TheChizler

kneemos wrote: »

It's my actions that make my belief a fact,otherwise I wouldn't bother with the good deed and I'd have sex with the neighbour...ie God has an effect so must be real.

I think that you have a very different definition of the word "real" to literally everybody else in the world. Fact because I believe it. And wrote this post.

Maximus Alexander

kneemos wrote: »

It's my actions that make my belief a fact,otherwise I wouldn't bother with the good deed and I'd have sex with the neighbour...ie God has an effect so must be real.

Are you suggesting that, if you found out for a fact tomorrow that God didn't exist, you'd cast away all your morals and do whatever you felt like at everyone else's expense? That the only reason you show respect or altruism to your fellow man is because you're afraid that you'll be punished by a wizard in the sky?

Maybe I'm taking you up wrong somehow, but otherwise f*ck me that's depressing.

kneemos

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Are you suggesting that, if you found out for a fact tomorrow that God didn't exist, you'd cast away all your morals and do whatever you felt like at everyone else's expense? That the only reason you show respect or altruism to your fellow man is because you're afraid that you'll be punished by a wizard in the sky?

Maybe I'm taking you up wrong somehow, but otherwise f*ck me that's depressing.

No,just an example.
If I'm motivated to commit good deeds by my belief in God then to me God is real and has an effect and to have an effect it has to exist.

Maximus Alexander

kneemos wrote: »

No,just an example.
If I'm motivated to commit good deeds by my belief in God then to me God is real and has an effect and to have an effect it has to exist.

Fair enough. I don't think that's sound reasoning though. Consider folks who build bunkers in the desert and stock them with canned food because they believe that extra terrestrials are going to come and enslave the Earth.

Their beliefs motivate them to act - but they don't cause the alien invaders to become 'real'.

smash

kneemos wrote: »

No,just an example.
If I'm motivated to commit good deeds by my belief in God then to me God is real and has an effect and to have an effect it has to exist.

By good deeds do you mean obey the law, or hand out 50's to random homeless people? Either way, neither prove any reality of a god.

Zubeneschamali

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

There is no evidence either way on the existence, or not, of God. There is only belief and faith, or lack thereof.

Catholic God used to leave loads of evidence, by all accounts: burning bushes, virgin births, people rising from the dead...

Even today, people getting a sainthood need to be associated with miracles. You already know those aren't real, or there would be loads of evidence for God.

Your statement is only true of gods which have been carefully created so that they cannot have any evidence for or against.

I can invent one of those a minute for the rest of my life, and there is no more or less evidence for Pongo, the god in my keyboard, than there is for the Catholic god. There is no way to pick one from the rest.

And isn't it a bit odd that most people pick the same undetectable god that their parents told them about when they were little? Things that make you go hmmm.

Grayson

kneemos wrote: »

No,just an example.
If I'm motivated to commit good deeds by my belief in God then to me God is real and has an effect and to have an effect it has to exist.

This is going to sound abstract and a bit too platonic but religion doesn't matter that much. the fact is that people all around the world know what "good" is and what "bad" is. It doesn't matter what their religion is or even if they don't have one. Religion did for many years provide a framework for it. In the middle ages for example in many European countries a sin was a crime and vice versa.

This did of course lead to muddling. You ended up with kings saying that since God had placed them in a position of power it was both a sin and a crime not to do what they said. Vincent De Paul set up poorhouses which were actually more like asylums because poverty was considered a sin and was bad for the soul.
In some Muslim countries you can be stoned for being an adulterer (especially if you are a woman). Although lets face it, muslim countries like that are a reflection of the worst times in Christianity's past.

laws generally are there to restrict the worst of humanity. And I mean not just individuals but in us all. They are they to help stop us from doing bad acts and enable us to perform good ones. The problem with religion or any extreme ideology is that it removes personal morals from the equation. people end up doing stuff because they say God is against it. And as we know there can be huge differences between what different people think God wants. We normally end up with a tyranny of the majority situation where minorities who disagree are persecuted. Which is why a secular government run on utilitarian principles is generally better for the populace. It allows people to live their lives whilst at the same time safe guarding them against the religion of others.

Anyway to get back on point, people generally know what good and bad are in general. Religion can actually cloud the innate humanity that we all possess.

Zubeneschamali

Grayson wrote: »

people generally know what good and bad are in general.

Sometimes they have to figure it out. For example - is it OK to transplant cloned stem cells from lines which originated form aborted fetuses to treat Parkinsons?

I don't want to discuss the issue itself, but where do answers to new moral questions like that come from?

Well, we see a debate, with contributions from various people, including religious people, and a consensus is agreed. It may be different in different countries. Nobody goes up a mountain with a stone tablet.

I see no reason to suppose it was any different in the past.

Maximus Alexander

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Well, we see a debate, with contributions from various people, including religious people, and a consensus is agreed. It may be different in different countries. Nobody goes up a mountain with a stone tablet.

I see no reason to suppose it was any different in the past.

Interesting point. It's sort of oddly amusing to consider a time when, instead discussing the morality of things like stem cell research, people were getting together to debate things like "Is it okay to kill?"

Eventually, they concluded that it wasn't.

Zubeneschamali

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Interesting point. It's sort of oddly amusing to consider a time when, instead discussing the morality of things like stem cell research, people were getting together to debate things like "Is it okay to kill?"

Consider slavery, for example. Bible god is OK with it - but now it is one of the worst crimes known.

And nobody got that memo from God on a stone tablet, either.

Grayson

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Sometimes they have to figure it out. For example - is it OK to transplant cloned stem cells from lines which originated form aborted fetuses to treat Parkinsons?

I don't want to discuss the issue itself, but where do answers to new moral questions like that come from?

Well, we see a debate, with contributions from various people, including religious people, and a consensus is agreed. It may be different in different countries. Nobody goes up a mountain with a stone tablet.

I see no reason to suppose it was any different in the past.

It's not like the answers to that question are in the bible either. And when you consider the sh1t that any fundamentalist believes, it's not really compatible with a secular society. We can work out the tricky ones but we shouldn't be deciding what is right and wrong for a society based on a book written two thousand years ago.

take murder for example. It might be a sin in the bible but that's not why it's illegal. It's wrong. It's bad for both individuals and society. We'd still have it as being illegal with or without any religious texts.
What was different in the past was that we burned people at the stake for being gay, jewish etc... All because of the churches teachings. Debate when it occurred never involved what was best for the people but rather what they thought God would want.
Western democracies, starting with France and the US, decided to ditch that. they looked for a separation of church and state. That was a huge leap forward.
Laws in these societies, and indeed all western democracies, are worked out on the same basic principles. They are generally based on utilitarianism and are rule based. That's how we figure out if something is right or wrong. Not based on an old religious text.

kneemos

clear thinking wrote: »

How do you explain the spontaneous apparaition of quantum particles in a vacuum then? There is no cause yet they appear and disappear.

Another fundament scientific principle is that energy can neiter be created nor destroyed, nothing caused energy to exist, it just exists and was not created. IE god did not create it.

And since energy is the basis for matter then no god can have created anything.

Another load of hocum is believers telling atheists that there must be some doubt as to the absence of a deity but fail to apply the same logic to their belief - that every believer must have some doubt about a gods existence.

In the case of christianity, the statement of adherence to the faith starts with 'We believe in one God....", not that "We have proof of the existence of one god..." Even the Faiths themselves are exactly that - faith in something that might exist, not knowledge that it does exist. Ultimately you either believe in fantastical supernatural creatures or you dont.

To reply to the point of the thread, I am one of those atheists who will go off on a rant if religion is raised. I do think it is stupid to believe in a deity, not that the believer is stupid. And as to the predominant religion in this country - if somehow it is proved beyond doubt to be real, i'd rather rot in hell than worship the christian god who blackmails, murders and has an ego so big he feels mere humans need to bow to make him feel better. All the moreso when there is scientific evidence that prayers simply do not work.

You're confusing religion with a God.

Baggy Trousers

kneemos wrote: »

You're confusing religion with a God.

Kneemos, I am surprised you are not off shagging the neighbour after the compelling posts written here recently.

kneemos

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

Kneemos, I am surprised you are not off shagging the neighbour after the compelling posts written here recently.

You obviously haven't seen the neighbors.

One eyed Jack

Grayson wrote: »

This is going to sound abstract and a bit too platonic but religion doesn't matter that much. the fact is that people all around the world know what "good" is and what "bad" is. It doesn't matter what their religion is or even if they don't have one. Religion did for many years provide a framework for it. In the middle ages for example in many European countries a sin was a crime and vice versa.

This did of course lead to muddling. You ended up with kings saying that since God had placed them in a position of power it was both a sin and a crime not to do what they said. Vincent De Paul set up poorhouses which were actually more like asylums because poverty was considered a sin and was bad for the soul.
In some Muslim countries you can be stoned for being an adulterer (especially if you are a woman). Although lets face it, muslim countries like that are a reflection of the worst times in Christianity's past.

laws generally are there to restrict the worst of humanity. And I mean not just individuals but in us all. They are they to help stop us from doing bad acts and enable us to perform good ones. The problem with religion or any extreme ideology is that it removes personal morals from the equation. people end up doing stuff because they say God is against it. And as we know there can be huge differences between what different people think God wants. We normally end up with a tyranny of the majority situation where minorities who disagree are persecuted. Which is why a secular government run on utilitarian principles is generally better for the populace. It allows people to live their lives whilst at the same time safe guarding them against the religion of others.

Anyway to get back on point, people generally know what good and bad are in general. Religion can actually cloud the innate humanity that we all possess.

It takes a couple of reads, but it's well worth it to actually understand where you're coming from. I would take it one step further though and say that the problem isn't actually religion at all, the problem is people. People who use ANY ideology to promote their own prejudices and biases, because they are the kind of people who think of themselves as superior to the rest of humanity, and they will corrupt and twist any abstract ideology to hammer home the point.

So, in this case, if we take religion - religion on it's own does nothing. It's an ideology, but it's the person's own inherent prejudices and biases (as you say - their innate humanity), that determines their perception of that abstract ideology. Some people will incorporate religion into their existing ideologies and use it to browbeat and lord it over everyone else that they are morally superior to them, and they will inflict all sorts of harm and pain and torture on other people that are unlike them, and feel completely justified in doing so. They'll be a pain in the ass for everyone else basically.

Then you take atheism - atheism on it's own does nothing. It's an ideology, but it's the person's own inherent prejudices and biases (as you say - their innate humanity), that determines their perception of that abstract ideology. Some people will incorporate atheism into their existing ideologies and use it to browbeat and lord it over everyone else that they are morally superior to them, and they will inflict all sorts of harm and pain and torture on other people that are unlike them, and feel completely justified in doing so. They'll be a pain in the ass for everyone else basically.

The thing is that nowadays, there are all sorts of ideologies to choose from if you want to feel superior to everyone else, and there are all sorts of ways in which an individual can interpret and incorporate those ideologies for themselves, so for example when you mention a utilitarian, secular society as the kind of society we should all aspire to, well, that would be alright if there weren't all sorts of other ideologies that people will use to appear to be morally superior to everyone else. Take for example black atheists in America (a secular, utilitarian society for the most part). They are part of Western atheism you mentioned earlier, but they don't care so much about secularism as they do about social justice and racism. They're actually working with religious organisations to combat racism and poverty as opposed to working against religious organisations. White atheists seem to care more about secularism than they do about racism and poverty. Then you have Atheism Plus, which incorporates social justice issues into their Atheist ideology in order to appear morally righteous.

Even the idea of humanity itself, as Sara pointed out earlier - originally started out as being an inherently religious philosophy (humanitarianism), but has evolved over time to become a secular philosophy, because more and more people started to adopt the ideology of humanitarianism and abandon the religious connotations. This allowed them to feel they were superior to everyone else, morally and ethically more righteous than everyone else, and anyone who has a different perspective of humanity, well, they're just ripe for abuse! You'll witness this in full effect in discussions around issues like abortion, and indeed as the lads mention above - stem cell research. Both sides will invoke the humanity card in order to feel that they're the more morally superior human beings than those who have a difference of opinion to them.

If you take Islam (as you mention Muslims above), you'll have people who identify as feminist, atheist, etc who will pour scorn on Islam, but then they have to tread a fine line as they don't want to appear to be racist either, because that would be morally reprehensible of course, so they can abuse and insult people, but not too much, because insulting Muslims gets you killed by Muslims who believe they are morally justified in killing you for disagreeing with their ideology.



TL:DR, this clip pretty much covers it, and could apply to any ideology, not just left or right wing politics -

kneemos

clear thinking wrote: »

Your first good point in a 48 page thread. Everyone else should thank me.

But no, I'm not confusing them.

Another scientific theory is that observation causes reality, so there is a kernel of truth in your dog being a cat comment. This is more likely than a god existing. As I observed this internet thread you came into existence so I must therefore be your god.

You are indeed confusing them and like all atheists can't see the wood for the trees.
Another analogy would be the spirit of Christmas that exists in a kids eye,would you deny it exists or isn't real?
You can rabbit on about test tubes and men in sky all you like but to say God's spirit doesn't influence peoples actions is patently ridiculous.

clear thinking

clear thinking wrote: »

What is patent is that the spirit you talk about is a delusion. Parents lying to their kids is at the very least questionable if not immoral. Do kids enjoy it, for sure, do they think their partents are hypocrites when the learn the christmas truth, absolutely. Btw look who is actually confusing religion and god- Christmas rituals are religious ritual and nothing to do with the belief in a god.
.

Just because you refuse to believe in the truth behind Christmas (and the catholic faith in general) in no way makes it a lie and in fact you have no right making accusations like that. Religion is an important part of a child's upbringing and I pity the children who are born into atheist familys and denied it.

kneemos

clear thinking wrote: »

What is patent is that the spirit you talk about is a delusion. Parents lying to their kids is at the very least questionable if not immoral. Do kids enjoy it, for sure, do they think their partents are hypocrites when the learn the christmas truth, absolutely. Btw look who is actually confusing religion and god- Christmas rituals are religious ritual and nothing to do with the belief in a god.

Slight aside but the pope and his buddies in Sri lanka were kissing a dolls feet today, if ever you wanted proof that the religious element of belief is stupid.

But while it is delusional, I do 100% agree that if you believe in a god then you believe that a gods spirit may affect you in some way, obviousy where we differ is that atheists think such mumbo jmbo is created inside your own head and not by an outside source such as reality.

The spirit is real delusional or not.

Zubeneschamali

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

in fact you have no right making accusations like that.

Kill the blasphemer! Nail him up!

Baggy Trousers

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

Just because you refuse to believe in the truth behind Christmas (and the catholic faith in general) in no way makes it a lie and in fact you have no right making accusations like that. Religion is an important part of a child's upbringing and I pity the children who are born into atheist familys and denied it.

Ah give up your oul sins. For children, Christmas has very little to with religion these days and you know it. It's much more about Santa and reindeers and presents and family and friends/relations and Charlie and the Chocolate factory and selection boxes and pantomimes and turkeys and sleep-ins etc etc. The only thing atheist families leave out is the mass!

Piliger

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

Religion is an important part of a child's upbringing and I pity the children who are born into atheist familys and denied it.

Astonishing and amazing ... all in one.

Baggy Trousers

kneemos wrote: »

The spirit is real delusional or not.

Kneemos, apologies in advance. I saw this funny video and thought of you.

hynesie08

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

Just because you refuse to believe in the truth behind Christmas (and the catholic faith in general) in no way makes it a lie and in fact you have no right making accusations like that. Religion is an important part of a child's upbringing and I pity the children who are born into atheist familys and denied it.

Just the Catholic children though right? Since all the rest are "wrong"

mrkiscool2

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

Religion is an important part of a child's upbringing and I pity the children who are born into atheist familys and denied it.

WHAT? Bringing children up to be intolerant of people, to believe those who are not like them have to be converted and brought over to the "one true religion", having them fear the fact they might go to hell or come back as a snail or something is important? Bullsh1t. Religion is an absolute horrible thing. I have no problem with people believing in a God or Gods but religion is just toxic. My children will not be brought up in a religious house but they will be educated about religion so they can make their own choice whenever they want. To say religion is important in a child's upbringing is absolutely ludicrous.

One eyed Jack

hynesie08 wrote: »

Just the Catholic children though right? Since all the rest are "wrong"

Reminded me of this -

Baggy Trousers

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

Ah give up your oul sins. For children, Christmas has very little to with religion these days and you know it. It's much more about Santa and reindeers and presents and family and friends/relations and Charlie and the Chocolate factory and selection boxes and pantomimes and turkeys and sleep-ins etc etc. The only thing atheist families leave out is the mass!

Christmas is very much about the above for children and much of it for adults too but there is no need to forget the religious side of it either including the crib, Christmas mass etc.

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

WHAT? Bringing children up to be intolerant of people, to believe those who are not like them have to be converted and brought over to the "one true religion", having them fear the fact they might go to hell or come back as a snail or something is important? Bullsh1t. Religion is an absolute horrible thing. I have no problem with people believing in a God or Gods but religion is just toxic. My children will not be brought up in a religious house but they will be educated about religion so they can make their own choice whenever they want. To say religion is important in a child's upbringing is absolutely ludicrous.

Of course its important for them to be brought up as Catholics. Thankfully in this country the vast majority of schools are catholic schools and teach it so some might pick it up who dont get it at home.

hynesie08

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

Of course its important for them to be brought up as Catholics. Thankfully in this country the vast majority of schools are catholic schools and teach it so some might pick it up who dont get it at home.

This is unbelievable, i was one of the longest to deny it, but there is no way you are a real person with these opinions in 2015

mrkiscool2

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

Christmas is very much about the above for children and much of it for adults too but there is no need to forget the religious side of it either including the crib, Christmas mass etc.



Of course its important for them to be brought up as Catholics. Thankfully in this country the vast majority of schools are catholic schools and teach it so some might pick it up who dont get it at home.

Wow. You are either trolling the hell out of everyone or else you are just so delusional it's not even funny!

Maximus Alexander

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

Christmas is very much about the above for children and much of it for adults too but there is no need to forget the religious side of it either including the crib, Christmas mass etc.

There's no need to remember it either tbf.

Rough Sleeper

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

Just because you refuse to believe in the truth behind Christmas (and the catholic faith in general) in no way makes it a lie and in fact you have no right making accusations like that. Religion is an important part of a child's upbringing and I pity the children who are born into atheist familys and denied it.

I can't really bring myself to believe that you're an actual person. I just imagine you're a bored Trinity Arts student posing as an offensive country stereotype in his ample spare time.

Bootros Bootros

hynesie08 wrote: »

This is unbelievable, i was one of the longest to deny it, but there is no way you are a real person with these opinions in 2015

Not since the great Catholic purge of 2014 anyways.

hynesie08

Bootros Bootros wrote: »

Not since the great Catholic purge of 2014 anyways.

I know a 72 year old retired guard who would share a lot of nox's opinions, but i refuse to believe anyone my age can be that narrow minded.

kylith

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

Of course its important for them to be brought up as Catholics. Thankfully in this country the vast majority of schools are catholic schools and teach it so some might pick it up who dont get it at home.

Schools should be for learning things that are of actual use to a person. If parents want their children to have religious instruction let them do it themselves.

shruikan2553

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

Of course its important for them to be brought up as Catholics. Thankfully in this country the vast majority of schools are catholic schools and teach it so some might pick it up who dont get it at home.

Why Catholic and not Protestant, Mormon, Sikh, Muslim?

Zubeneschamali

hynesie08 wrote: »

I know a 72 year old retired guard who would share a lot of nox's opinions

I don't think nox is too fond of the guards, or the treacherous vile informers who help them.

hynesie08

hynesie08 wrote: »

This is unbelievable, i was one of the longest to deny it, but there is no way you are a real person with these opinions in 2015

I don't think my opinion are much out of the ordinary at all. All I said was I though that it's a good thing for a child to be raised Catholic and it's good that it's taught in schools, you will find many more people who agree with me than disagree. Do you think all the young peope who identify as Catholic or all the young couples who baptise their children and bring them to mass would disagree?

clear thinking wrote: »

1st off belief is not a choice, secondly it is not a 'truth', third, Santa is clearly and unambiguously a lie, 5th i every right to make accusations that lying to children is immoral. Religion has caused more problems for children in this country than it ever solved. And taking the leap of speaking for all atheists you can take your pity back because you are the one who needs it, not the poor little atheist children.

Edit 4th was the catholic faith but i don't have free speech to say what a load of cobblers the doll waving pope espouses is.

I have come across a very small number of people in my life who have a problem with parents pretending their is a Santa and each and everyone has been a special type of gobs*ite, one mother had to be ran out of my primary school numerous times and got the head eaten of her multiple times by parents until they eventually fecked off out of the area for coming in trying to cause hassle in the school one thing being trying to tell children there was no Santa and that all parents were horrible liars etc. in other worlds your opinions no longer count on my eyes.

TwoShedsJackson

I don't think my opinion are much out of the ordinary at all.

They are, as is your opinion on drink driving for example.

TwoShedsJackson

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

They are, as is your opinion on drink driving for example.

Not among a very large number of people in rural areas.

Baggy Trousers

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

I don't think my opinion are much out of the ordinary at all. All I said was I though that it's a good thing for a child to be raised Catholic and it's good that it's taught in schools, you will find many more people who agree with me than disagree. Do you think all the young peope who identify as Catholic or all the young couples who baptise their children and bring them to mass would disagree?



I have come across a very small number of people in my life who have a problem with parents pretending their is a Santa and each and everyone has been a special type of gobs*ite, one mother had to be ran out of my primary school numerous times and got the head eaten of her multiple times by parents until they eventually fecked off out of the area for coming in trying to cause hassle in the school one thing being trying to tell children there was no Santa and that all parents were horrible liars etc. in other worlds your opinions no longer count on my eyes.

Where exactly do you live and what year is it there?

Electric Sheep

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

I don't think my opinion are much out of the ordinary at all. All I said was I though that it's a good thing for a child to be raised Catholic and it's good that it's taught in schools, you will find many more people who agree with me than disagree. Do you think all the young peope who identify as Catholic or all the young couples who baptise their children and bring them to mass would disagree?



I have come across a very small number of people in my life who have a problem with parents pretending their is a Santa and each and everyone has been a special type of gobs*ite, one mother had to be ran out of my primary school numerous times and got the head eaten of her multiple times by parents until they eventually fecked off out of the area for coming in trying to cause hassle in the school one thing being trying to tell children there was no Santa and that all parents were horrible liars etc. in other worlds your opinions no longer count on my eyes.

There IS no Santa, and the parents WERE lying.

Emperor's new clothes indeed.

Baggy Trousers

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

Where exactly do you live and what year is it there?

Ireland, 2015.

Baggy Trousers

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

Ireland, 2015.

Where in Ireland?

Electric Sheep

Rough Sleeper wrote: »

I can't really bring myself to believe that you're an actual person. I just imagine you're a bored Trinity Arts student posing as an offensive country stereotype in his ample spare time.

I agree, I am fairly sure that Nox is just a piece of performance art. He keep getting the reaction he is looking for, though.

mrkiscool2

Corbin Silly Pan wrote: »

I don't think my opinion are much out of the ordinary at all. All I said was I though that it's a good thing for a child to be raised Catholic and it's good that it's taught in schools, you will find many more people who agree with me than disagree. Do you think all the young peope who identify as Catholic or all the young couples who baptise their children and bring them to mass would disagree?



I have come across a very small number of people in my life who have a problem with parents pretending their is a Santa and each and everyone has been a special type of gobs*ite, one mother had to be ran out of my primary school numerous times and got the head eaten of her multiple times by parents until they eventually fecked off out of the area for coming in trying to cause hassle in the school one thing being trying to tell children there was no Santa and that all parents were horrible liars etc. in other worlds your opinions no longer count on my eyes.

We have no problem with you being a Catholic, or whatever you want to be. What we do have a problem with is you claiming that the best way to raise a child is as a Catholic! That's fcuking ridiculous! Religion is an extremely toxic thing and raising your child to live in fear and believe they are better than others because of your belief is wrong!

As for the whole Santa thing, I have no opinion on that. Personally I agree with it as it makes Christmas so magical and have them believe that their is magic in the world. I figured out Santa wasn't real and I didn't care too much!

Electric Sheep

Electric Sheep wrote: »

There IS no Santa, and the parents WERE lying.

Emperor's new clothes indeed.

It was none of that wagons business though, luckily Santa wasn't ruined on anyone as either it wasn't heard by the children or they just they she was an idiot (which she was). This was many years ago, it's rare you find someone wanting to ruin the fun of Christmas for children.

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

Where in Ireland?

Not of anyone's concern.