Setting up a UCD Atheist Society

Snoviet

Hey guys,

I am in the process of trying to set up an atheist society on UCD campus. When I arrived here in 2014 I was surprised that there were 3 different Christian Societies, and an Islamic Society, and yet not even a humanist or secular society to speak of.

I would love to make a society where we can have discussions, debates, and guest speakers on issues like atheism, secularism, regressive leftism, Islamophobia, and all the trendy topics today. A little activism in regards to the blasphemy law, presidential oath and most importantly school patronage would be on the agenda too. Some delightful social functions as well of course.

I have been making my way through the application process piece by piece and have met with several members of the Societies office, as well as multiple emails and a meeting with an Atheist Ireland representative. While heavily affiliation between Atheist Ireland and the society does not seem to be permitted, they will be happy to help the society in terms of guest speaks, promotion and any other means.

So far I have:
- created a suitable constitution with Atheist Ireland the conforms to UCD standards.
- a mission statement.
- a vague plan of activity that needs finer details.
- 80 signatures of support (Requirement is 30. Got 80 in the science hub in under an hour).

Now, the thing is, there was an Atheist Society on campus a few years ago that sadly fell apart. As a result, Richard Butler seems very hesitant to give the same type of society another shot. Personally I think 6 years can make a huge difference for the amount of people that feel comfortable being open about their atheism. Also, working together with Atheist Ireland would allow us to be perhaps more vocal than the previous society. I am really willing to put the work in for this project. Anything to distract me from actual study.

Is there any tips you guys can give me on going the extra mile to reassure the societies committee that the society would last? Would it be worth getting more signatures? Any other advice?

Would really appreciate any input!

a fat guy

Why did the society fall apart beforehand exactly?

I've nothing against Atheism itself but if what I've seen online is anything to go by, all an Atheist society will do is moan about various religions.

If this is why the previous society fell apart, then I can see exactly why the previous society fell apart. UCD doesn't need what essentially amounts to a hate group on campus.

If all my assumptions are correct (Hoping not!) then you'd best put in a lot of effort in ensuring that the society is more about Atheism itself, rather than how crappy religion is.

The problem with that is that I've never seen "The history of Atheism", or something specific like that, being discussed before. You could always introduce an element of philosophy to it, which could tie in nicely with rationalist aspect of Atheism ("Unless there's solid evidence, then I don't believe it"). But then that's not really Atheism anymore...

Anyway, good luck with the society!

Snoviet

a fat guy wrote: »

Why did the society fall apart beforehand exactly?

I've nothing against Atheism itself but if what I've seen online is anything to go by, all an Atheist society will do is moan about various religions.

If this is why the previous society fell apart, then I can see exactly why the previous society fell apart. UCD doesn't need what essentially amounts to a hate group on campus.

If all my assumptions are correct (Hoping not!) then you'd best put in a lot of effort in ensuring that the society is more about Atheism itself, rather than how crappy religion is.

The problem with that is that I've never seen "The history of Atheism", or something specific like that, being discussed before. You could always introduce an element of philosophy to it, which could tie in nicely with rationalist aspect of Atheism ("Unless there's solid evidence, then I don't believe it"). But then that's not really Atheism anymore...

Anyway, good luck with the society!

Oh wow okay,

Well part of the reason I would like to set up an Atheist Society is to counter the taboo associated with the word 'Atheist' itself. In an Atheist Society is a hate group against religious people, that automatically makes Christian societies and Islamic societies hate groups against non-religious people. Atheists obviously disagree with religious people on numerous issues, but I myself and many atheists are for a secular state that allows any citizen to privately believe and practice whatever they want. As long as any particular world view or ideology is not favoured by the state. (Ireland has some work to do in this department. Many people of minority faiths would be aligned with even Atheist Ireland on such issues.).

I am disheartened by the fact that many people will defend bigotry against minority faiths to a great extent (which is good) and yet happily make statements including "Atheists are all X". We are just people who happen to not believe in any god. Thats it. We may differ in just about every other way. We are just people. I think the stereotype of the angry reddit dweller is a little too prevalent as stereotypes go. Most of us are people with flaws that try to be nice most of the time like anyone else. So an Atheist society would indeed have an element of philosophy in it. How to proceed with our lives and our country on the assumption that there is no god.

Atheism by definition is a very broad term so a "history of atheism" would be very hard to compile. Atheists have come out confidently in large numbers only over the last decade or so thanks to people like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens.

Whatever the case, I have absolutely no intention of "moaning" or "hating" anyone. Unless of course you think complaining about blasphemy laws and being excluded from government offices is "moaning".

Skatedude

Not sure why you would need an atheist society in ucd? others have formed collage societies based on common religion, But you want to form one based on none?

It's like explaining why you ticked the box on a form stating that your religion is "None".

And i'm saying this as as an atheist myself. Why involve yourself in something you dont even believe in?

Snoviet

Skatedude wrote: »

Not sure why you would need an atheist society in ucd?

Well it's a good thing you aren't setting one up then! Also you mustn't have read my original post where I stated why I would.

Skatedude wrote: »

And i'm saying this as as an atheist myself. Why involve yourself in something you dont even believe in?

This is indeed something I hear from some atheists I know myself.

I don't believe in god, but I do believe in equality for people of all faiths and none. I believe in minority representation of all forms. I believe in a secular state. I believe in reason. I believe in science. I believe in the safe criticism of all ideas. I am not happy to see irrationality and dogma influence my country, that I like and contribute to.

And I believe these things are worth arguing for, thanks very much.

Skatedude wrote: »

It's like explaining why you ticked the box on a form stating that your religion is "None".

Your argument would be more relevant if the entire world didn't discriminate on any issue for religious purposes. This is sadly not the case. In Ireland the marriage equality referendum and the future abortion referendum are deeply to do with prevailing religious beliefs in this country. Trust me, if this was as secular country I would be happy to move on exclusively to other political issues, but the final hangovers from the 20th century RCC still need to be removed. I am opposed to state backed Pro-Atheist messages and institutions as much as religious ones. Surely you would support neutrality in this manner?

As you are an atheist, I would be curious to know:

- are you happy that Muslims, Atheists, Catholics, Hindus, Buddhists and everyone else pay their taxes and yet over 90% of the schools in this countries are run by the RCC? Is that your idea of a fair secular democracy?
- do you think state funded schools should be able to prioritise children of catholic parents and list others as "category 2" children as they currently do, pre civil rights style? Replace the word "catholic" and "muslim" in these policies with "white" and "black", or "heterosexual" and "homosexual", and you should begin to see the problem with such legislation.
- do you think you should be excluded from honestly taking the Irish presidential oath?
- do you think Ireland should maintain a law brought in less than decade ago that makes the act of blasphemy a crime?
- do you think it is correct that it is virtually impossible to become a primary school teacher in Ireland as an open atheist?
- are you happy that the current constitution has numerous religious mentions and is absolutely non secular?

Even if you don't feel compelled to stand up for these issues (I have many more cynical atheist friends who oppose activism of this sort entirely), in what ways would you be opposed to others that do? And if you oppose it because you think it's trivial, isn't opposing something trivial even MORE trivial? I am interested to hear what you have to say.

I want to make some positive change in the world, and I can't solve world hunger or peace. So to me, many of these issues are low hanging fruit that can more quickly be addressed and improve peoples lives in small ways.

a fat guy

Snoviet wrote: »

Oh wow okay,

Well part of the reason I would like to set up an Atheist Society is to counter the taboo associated with the word 'Atheist' itself. In an Atheist Society is a hate group against religious people, that automatically makes Christian societies and Islamic societies hate groups against non-religious people. Atheists obviously disagree with religious people on numerous issues, but I myself and many atheists are for a secular state that allows any citizen to privately believe and practice whatever they want. As long as any particular world view or ideology is not favoured by the state. (Ireland has some work to do in this department. Many people of minority faiths would be aligned with even Atheist Ireland on such issues.).

I am disheartened by the fact that many people will defend bigotry against minority faiths to a great extent (which is good) and yet happily make statements including "Atheists are all X". We are just people who happen to not believe in any god. Thats it. We may differ in just about every other way. We are just people. I think the stereotype of the angry reddit dweller is a little too prevalent as stereotypes go. Most of us are people with flaws that try to be nice most of the time like anyone else. So an Atheist society would indeed have an element of philosophy in it. How to proceed with our lives and our country on the assumption that there is no god.

Atheism by definition is a very broad term so a "history of atheism" would be very hard to compile. Atheists have come out confidently in large numbers only over the last decade or so thanks to people like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens.

Whatever the case, I have absolutely no intention of "moaning" or "hating" anyone. Unless of course you think complaining about blasphemy laws and being excluded from government offices is "moaning".

Atheism is far from taboo when it comes to reasonable people. I wouldn't blink at someone's lack of faith, but that's anecdotal evidence that isn't fair to use in this topic. It'd be far more effective for me to point out how easily Ireland got gay marriage and how readily the people are to oppose the church for its wrongdoings in the past. And you can bet your left nut (Or fallopian tube) that we'll be getting abortion soon enough too. Two decades ago this kind of thing simply wouldn't have happened. The grip that the church has on Ireland is very much loosening with time.

And you can't just handwave the anti-religion sentiment in Atheist groups as a thing that happens on Reddit. You only have to compare the Christian forum with the Atheist/Agnostic forum to see the difference in attitude between the two groups. The A/A forum is FAR more aggressive and hateful against religion than the Christianity group is towards A/A.

It's well and fine to say "myself and many atheists are for a secular state that allows any citizen to privately believe and practice whatever they want", but when presented these forums how can you possibly say that and know for certain that the rest of the society will hold those same views? You'll have one hell of a job keeping the society from cultivating a group-hate feeling on religion when one enters whatever place you'll hold meetings.

Lastly, Skatedude does raise a good point on why such a society should exist in the first place (hence why I mentioned the history of Atheism). I say this because when a societies main focus is anti-anything instead of pro-whateveritactuallyis, you can be certain that it is a hate-group and it'll cause trouble.

The more I think on this , the more certain I am that you will absolutely HAVE to lay down the law on any anti-religion sentiment in the society. This will be a difficult task, as you'll have to come up with something about Atheism itself, rather than "not-Atheism" if that makes sense.

Anyway, it's a Wednesday morning and I'm sure we all have classes. I finish by mentioning that I'm saying this as someone who identifies as Agnostic, so you don't get the idea that a bunch of Catholic-folk are raining on your parade.

By all means go for it, but I genuinely think you're going to get more than you bargained for.

sparkthatbled

I would join but I don't believe in organised societies.

Snoviet

sparkthatbled wrote: »

I would join but I don't believe in organised societies.

I welcome your enthusiasm. How would you suggest anyone ever make changes to society if people never band together?

Phyrexian

Signatures don't make a society. There was something last year of people trying to make a UCD Humanist Society, search around fb and I'm sure you could contact them. I would consider joining their effort and rebranding specifically to Humanism (of course you could have a debate on Humanism v Atheism). In principle, there is nothing wrong with any sort Atheist flavour of society. My friend went on exchange to Austin and he told me there were two humanist societies in his college. But Butler clearly has a reason to say that society failed and shouldn't return (after all BioSoc came back, on the point that they once existed about 20 years earlier). I suspect there was a LOT of drama with Athiests 1.0. You'll need to show what you bring which is different and peaceful now. Shame you missed the interfaith gathering I think it was earlier this week...

Also the "history" argument is a red herring? There's no "history" required for Horse Racing Soc, "RetroSoc" (a defunct society from the 90s where they wore afros and disco danced??? Butler told me about them idk), One Health etc. all just a group of people with an interest.

Tbh making a society is finding a bunch of people who want to not just join it, but RUN it, many years into the future (or at least a year or two in find people who can replace the starting gang). It can't be just you alone! Frankly, you need a network of people in actually recognised societies. I've never personally founded a society, but you'll need people in recognised societies to book rooms for you (joint events are the only things you can really do unrecognised) and help you with just the knowhow on how things are done.

You also need a senior treasurer (permanent member of staff who effectively signs off on your accounts but in reality if chosen well can be a great ally). I was an Auditor of a society with a great senior treasurer, you want one in your gang. Are any members of staff affiliated with Atheist Ireland?

tl;dr power of friendship - it cannot be you ALONE

Snoviet

Phyrexian wrote: »

Signatures don't make a society. There was something last year of people trying to make a UCD Humanist Society, search around fb and I'm sure you could contact them. I would consider joining their effort and rebranding specifically to Humanism (of course you could have a debate on Humanism v Atheism). In principle, there is nothing wrong with any sort Atheist flavour of society. My friend went on exchange to Austin and he told me there were two humanist societies in his college. But Butler clearly has a reason to say that society failed and shouldn't return (after all BioSoc came back, on the point that they once existed about 20 years earlier). I suspect there was a LOT of drama with Athiests 1.0. You'll need to show what you bring which is different and peaceful now. Shame you missed the interfaith gathering I think it was earlier this week...

Also the "history" argument is a red herring? There's no "history" required for Horse Racing Soc, "RetroSoc" (a defunct society from the 90s where they wore afros and disco danced??? Butler told me about them idk), One Health etc. all just a group of people with an interest.

Tbh making a society is finding a bunch of people who want to not just join it, but RUN it, many years into the future (or at least a year or two in find people who can replace the starting gang). It can't be just you alone! Frankly, you need a network of people in actually recognised societies. I've never personally founded a society, but you'll need people in recognised societies to book rooms for you (joint events are the only things you can really do unrecognised) and help you with just the knowhow on how things are done.

You also need a senior treasurer (permanent member of staff who effectively signs off on your accounts but in reality if chosen well can be a great ally). I was an Auditor of a society with a great senior treasurer, you want one in your gang. Are any members of staff affiliated with Atheist Ireland?

tl;dr power of friendship - it cannot be you ALONE

Thank you very much for being the first person that didn't just simply try to talk me out of my work!

I am willing to run the risk of failure and believe I can get members and form a committee. I have prepared quite a lot so far and Atheist Ireland are very pleased with my current progress.

What I am entirely concerned about on this thread, is how I can convince BUTLER to give me the go ahead. I don't need more convincing, I am committed to the project. Evangelical agnosticism will be much more welcome after I have got approval for the society. I would be happy to discuss any issue at all!

But what I started this thread for was on advise on how to get approval, nothing more. Difficulty getting members will be my problem, but I am fairly optimistic in this regard.

Hmm thats a good question, I will ask my friends at Atheist Ireland if they have any campus staff in their ranks. They would be a great ally.

Regarding other societies, I believe my friends in Labour Youth might be willing to help me in some ways.

I have discussed the society name quite a bit and settled on Atheist Society. I wager a more provocative albeit slightly more exclusive title is better to start with. But I would happily jut join a Humanist society if such a thing existed already.

Let me worry about committee members and getting people to join. Any nuggets of wisdom about society starting in general would be well appreciated!

Snoviet

a fat guy wrote: »

Atheism is far from taboo when it comes to reasonable people.

We are talking about the Irish electorate.

Derby Deasy

Snoviet wrote: »

I myself and many atheists are for a secular state that allows any citizen to privately believe and practice whatever they want.

Oh hold the press!

That's not exactly a stirring idea. There are probably only a handful of people in this country, out of millions, who would deny a right to freedom of religious belief.

What you are proposing is a society for people who don't believe in any God. That's neither controversial or uncommon.
What you are proposing is a society for people who accept the right to freedom of religious beleif. That's in now way controversial or uncommon either.

An atheist society which doesn't go around moaning about religions will fail because it will arouse precisely zero passion and does not court a contentious debate. It revolves solely around a simple epistemological declaration: There is no God. OK! Now what?

Moan or die. And if you moan, you run falling into a certain stereotype that hasn't been aided by some borderline histrionic celebrity atheists.

I studied previously in France where there was a Laïcité/ Secularism Society in my university, which I joined, and it held some very interesting events. Like Humanism, these kinds of societies are different in that they attempt to perpetuate a positive idea as opposed to defining themselves by what they are not, and moaning about what others are.

I agree with the person that said it really has to be a group effort. Any successful society on campus has always had a dynamic membership, otherwise they burn out, because Dear Leaders eventually graduate.

desertcircus

The aims you're describing would probably be better served by a secularist society rather than an atheist one. Atheists as a group actually don't have a great deal in common with each other, and I'd guess that their cultural and political leanings are a good deal more varied than most religious groupings. Some atheists are leftwing social democrats who worry about whether their quinoa is fair trade and listen to folk music. Some atheists are hardcore libertarians who's rather set their hair on fire than live in the kind of society the first set of atheists would consider ideal. Some think Harris and Dawkins are brilliant, some think they're outright bigots. The only thing most atheists would reliably agree on is secularism, and that's something a lot of religious people would also support.

Peregrinus

I think it would help to know why the previous society disintegrated, since that may be at the root of concerns about the new one.

There could be a concern that the negative definition of atheism ("lack of any belief in a god or gods") isn't, in the end, enough to sustain a functioning college society. Can we imagine an Apolitical Society, for people who hold no political convictions? Or a society for people who aren't interested in sport, and don't see any value in it? And if the previous Atheist Society fell apart well, that might tend to reinfoce that perception.

The perception is wrong, obviously, since Atheist Ireland has sustained itself for many years, so there's no reason why an Atheist Society in UCD couldn't do likewise. But if you could find out why the previous society fell to bits, you might be able to redress concerns that yours will do likewise.

The other thing you can do is start the society anyway, and then seek recognition. If you are already organising meetings and activities, and people are attending them, and are participating in other ways, it becomes very hard to argue that your society isn't viable. I appreciate that your access to College facilities will be limited; you may need to organise, e.g. a joint meeting with an existing college society, or a function off-campus, or whatever.

The third thing you could do is to re-package the society in more affirmative terms - a Humanist Society, or a Secularist Society, or a Campaign to Separate Church and State, or something of the kind. But I appreciate that you may not want to do this - you don't want to focus on humanism or secularism, but on atheism - and in any event it may be too late. Having already approached the College an an atheist society, any re-badging at this point might look artificial.

Snoviet

Derby Deasy wrote: »

Oh hold the press!

That's not exactly a stirring idea. There are probably only a handful of people in this country, out of millions, who would deny a right to freedom of religious belief.

What you are proposing is a society for people who don't believe in any God. That's neither controversial or uncommon.
What you are proposing is a society for people who accept the right to freedom of religious beleif. That's in now way controversial or uncommon either.

An atheist society which doesn't go around moaning about religions will fail because it will arouse precisely zero passion and does not court a contentious debate. It revolves solely around a simple epistemological declaration: There is no God. OK! Now what?

Moan or die. And if you moan, you run falling into a certain stereotype that hasn't been aided by some borderline histrionic celebrity atheists.

I studied previously in France where there was a Laïcité/ Secularism Society in my university, which I joined, and it held some very interesting events. Like Humanism, these kinds of societies are different in that they attempt to perpetuate a positive idea as opposed to defining themselves by what they are not, and moaning about what others are.

I agree with the person that said it really has to be a group effort. Any successful society on campus has always had a dynamic membership, otherwise they burn out, because Dear Leaders eventually graduate.

Friend, why the sarcasm and exclamation marks?

I am a secularist and support not having discrimination based on religion. Ireland currently does.

I am atheist and promote rational thought and reason. These are lacking in the modern world and Ireland.

In any case, as I have stated a few times before, I am looking for pragmatic pointers on how to establish a strong society and get approval. I am already quite committed to my ideas and am not looking for discouragement related to atheist societies in general. I am an Atheist Ireland member, these are my principles. I will happily debate this topic and often do, with religious and non religious alike, but that was not the intended topic of this thread.

Thank you.

Snoviet

desertcircus wrote: »

The only thing most atheists would reliably agree on is secularism, and that's something a lot of religious people would also support.

Then why doesn't the law in Ireland respect this in Education, Politics, Freedom of Speech and the Constitution? I am glad so many agree, but I actively support implementing this as a reality.

And while Atheists certainly do vary with opinions on all manner of ideas as is very healthy, the majority are left leaning politically and better educated, and rarely fans of country music or against gay rights. I do not mean to imply anything about these unrelated interest, only that to say Atheists are as diverse as the entire population is not true. But yes of course, I am sure there are Atheists who may disagree on almost everything with me. I just suspect they are in the minority.

Snoviet

Peregrinus wrote: »

I think it would help to know why the previous society disintegrated, since that may be at the root of concerns about the new one.

There could be a concern that the negative definition of atheism ("lack of any belief in a god or gods") isn't, in the end, enough to sustain a functioning college society. Can we imagine an Apolitical Society, for people who hold no political convictions? Or a society for people who aren't interested in sport, and don't see any value in it? And if the previous Atheist Society fell apart well, that might tend to reinforce that perception.

The perception is wrong, obviously, since Atheist Ireland has sustained itself for many years, so there's no reason why an Atheist Society in UCD couldn't do likewise. But if you could find out why the previous society fell to bits, you might be able to redress concerns that yours will do likewise.

The other thing you can do is start the society anyway, and then seek recognition. If you are already organising meetings and activities, and people are attending them, and are participating in other ways, it becomes very hard to argue that your society isn't viable. I appreciate that your access to College facilities will be limited; you may need to organise, e.g. a joint meeting with an existing college society, or a function off-campus, or whatever.

The third thing you could do is to re-package the society in more affirmative terms - a Humanist Society, or a Secularist Society, or a Campaign to Separate Church and State, or something of the kind. But I appreciate that you may not want to do this - you don't want to focus on humanism or secularism, but on atheism - and in any event it may be too late. Having already approached the College an an atheist society, any re-badging at this point might look artificial.

Well! Your reply is surprisingly constructive!

You raise good points to consider. I have spent a while on deciding a Society name and while not 100% happy with any of the options, I feel the most likely to succeed is the rather blunt "Atheist Society" at the moment.

I believe my contacts in Labour Youth and Atheist Ireland could be useful for extra support in some ways.

I will gather some more signatures I think. If I have well over 100 signatures I think it will be hard to argue that the idea is unpopular.

Thank you for your input!

Peregrinus

Snoviet wrote: »

Well! Your reply is surprisingly constructive!

Should I be offended that you are surprised that my reply is constructive?



You raise good points to consider. I have spent a while on deciding a Society name and while not 100% happy with any of the options, I feel the most likely to succeed is the rather blunt "Atheist Society" at the moment.

I believe my contacts in Labour Youth and Atheist Ireland could be useful for extra support in some ways.

Snoviet wrote: »

I will gather some more signatures I think. If I have well over 100 signatures I think it will be hard to argue that the idea is unpopular.

One person actually coming to a function or activity that you have organised is worth twenty signatures, in terms of demonstrating interest and support. One person going on a committee to help organise functions and activities is worth fifty signatures.

Snoviet

Peregrinus wrote: »

Should I be offended that you are surprised that my reply is constructive?

Not at all! This is my first thread on boards.ie. The only forum (computer related) I am a long time user of usually has highly encouraging and helpful replies to questions I've had so I was slightly disappointed with the somewhat different vibe here. Your reply is was in the format I was seeking.

Yes I totally agree. Real world examples of activity are the most important. But sadly I can't whisper "UCD Atheist Society" around campus until I get approval, as doing so would void the application. (Save of course for the petition). I can't even hold events with Atheist Ireland to help spread the word yet although I might get into Butler about that...

Peregrinus

Well, of course, I'll take your word for it about the requirements for recognition.

It does seem a bit odd that the rules would prevent you from doing the one thing that would demonstrate the popularity and vitality of the society that you want to have recognised. Still, bureaucratic rules are often bizarre.

Best of luck with the application.

Peregrinus

Well, of course, I'll take your word for it about the requirements for recognition.

It does seem a bit odd that the rules would prevent you from doing the one thing that would demonstrate the popularity and vitality of the society that you want to have recognised. Still, bureaucratic rules are often bizarre.

Best of luck with the application.

Derby Deasy

Snoviet wrote: »

am looking for pragmatic pointers on how to establish a strong society and get approval. I am already quite committed to my ideas and am not looking for discouragement related to atheist societies in general.

I am being pragmatic. I'm suggesting you should frame the society in positive terms, i.e. what you favour, instead of a negative frame reference which excludes theists who actually favour secularism, reason and logic.

So be pragmatic. Many people have an aversion to atheists because of what can sometimes seem like a pointlessly belligerent, cranky 'movement' without any cohesive structures of aims.

You might think that's unfair, but you asked for pragmatism. And if I may make an observation, I think it's interesting that you wrote the constitution singlehandedly and are now dismissing most of the suggestions on this thread. I suggest that doesn't bode well.

Derby Deasy

Snoviet wrote: »

am looking for pragmatic pointers on how to establish a strong society and get approval. I am already quite committed to my ideas and am not looking for discouragement related to atheist societies in general.

I am being pragmatic. I'm suggesting you should frame the society in positive terms, i.e. what you favour, instead of a negative frame of reference which excludes theists who actually favour secularism, reason and logic.

So be pragmatic. Many people have an aversion to atheists because of what can sometimes seem like a pointlessly belligerent, cranky 'movement' without any cohesive structures of aims.

You might think that's unfair, but you asked for pragmatism. And if I may make an observation, I think it's interesting that you wrote the constitution singlehandedly and are now dismissing most of the suggestions on this thread. I suggest that doesn't bode well.

Kiltennel

You still haven't laid out what your Society is about other than the common aspect that members share the same belief. This isn't sufficient to run a society, nor is list of a couple of hundred signatures. You'll need to prove the following if you want recognition from Butler and the council.

1) A committee in place, one person cannot do this alone (I say that as a society Auditor myself)
2) What will your society do? What events will happen? How will members benefit from being part of the society?
3) What do you need to run the society i.e. finances, support, speakers etc

It is also paramount that you find out why the previous society fell apart. This is where Butler's concerns will lie. Furthermore, you will need to be able to convince the recognition committee that your proposed society will do all of the above and be a benefit to the campus. I think you're placing far too much emphasis on signatures. I could get 300-400 signatures in a day camped out on the walkway. You'll need to prove you have more than just a list of "supporters" (students will sign anything). Having the support of a handful of lecturers may help, especially one who is willing to act as your Senior Treasurer and assist in promoting the society.

You seem quite adverse to a name change but "Atheist Society" doesn't have a very welcoming name. Humanist Society or Secular Society sounds a lot more welcoming and I'd imagine will get a lot more traction than Atheist Society. I say that as an atheist myself.

Hotblack Desiato

Disclaimer: I got my degree in the other place (boo hiss - although I never studied there) and for most of you I'm old enough to be your dad, if I hadn't been able to source illegal rubbers way back when.

a fat guy wrote: »

And you can bet your left nut (Or fallopian tube) that we'll be getting abortion soon enough too. Two decades ago this kind of thing simply wouldn't have happened. The grip that the church has on Ireland is very much loosening with time.

You must have a rather loose connection to your nuts (pun somewhat intended.) There is NO way that the 8th amendment will be easily overturned. I'm just about old enough to remember it first time around, it was nasty as f*** then, and there's plenty of evidence on your usual social networks and media channels it'll be nasty as f*** next time around.

Think of the most hateful nasty s***e you heard in the marriage equality referendum, multiply it by 100 and you might have some idea. MURDERERS will seem like a compliment after a while. Be prepared.

And you can't just handwave the anti-religion sentiment in Atheist groups as a thing that happens on Reddit. You only have to compare the Christian forum with the Atheist/Agnostic forum to see the difference in attitude between the two groups. The A/A forum is FAR more aggressive and hateful against religion than the Christianity group is towards A/A.

Bollox. The xtian forum regularly derides and bans posters merely for questioning their belief, while A&A allows religionistas to pretty much post whatever they like. That doesn't mean it'll get a good reception, naturally, but if one is only seeking agreement one should not post in a discussion forum. Except Christianity.

It's well and fine to say "myself and many atheists are for a secular state that allows any citizen to privately believe and practice whatever they want", but when presented these forums how can you possibly say that and know for certain that the rest of the society will hold those same views? You'll have one hell of a job keeping the society from cultivating a group-hate feeling on religion when one enters whatever place you'll hold meetings.

Double standard. Why should non-belief be kept to a standard which belief does not keep to?
Religionistas say all sorts of hateful things against non-believers (And, of course, believers in the wrong religion :rolleyes: ) but, as ever, religious hate gets a free pass.

The more I think on this , the more certain I am that you will absolutely HAVE to lay down the law on any anti-religion sentiment in the society. This will be a difficult task, as you'll have to come up with something about Atheism itself, rather than "not-Atheism" if that makes sense.

See above. You may as well demand that a religious society be banned from promoting pro-religious sentiment.

I finish by mentioning that I'm saying this as someone who identifies as Agnostic

You're not going to get off that non-fence that easily :pac:

Derby Deasy wrote: »

That's not exactly a stirring idea. There are probably only a handful of people in this country, out of millions, who would deny a right to freedom of religious belief.

Yet there are many who deny the right to freedom not to hold a religious belief. Including 96% of primary school teachers who happily indoctrinate kids with or without parental approval... some of these teachers are our politicians of the future.

Snoviet wrote: »

Then why doesn't the law in Ireland respect this in Education, Politics, Freedom of Speech and the Constitution? I am glad so many agree, but I actively support implementing this as a reality.

And while Atheists certainly do vary with opinions on all manner of ideas as is very healthy, the majority are left leaning politically and better educated, and rarely fans of country music or against gay rights. I do not mean to imply anything about these unrelated interest, only that to say Atheists are as diverse as the entire population is not true. But yes of course, I am sure there are Atheists who may disagree on almost everything with me. I just suspect they are in the minority.

You are confusing left-leaning (an economic stance) with liberalism (an authoritarian vs. liberalism stance)

I'm not left-leaning economically, and there are left-leaning libertarians and left-leaning autocrats (Stalin) so it says nothing as to one's stance on that axis.

Good luck with your society OP, NUI needs to do something to atone for electing Ronan Mullen to the Senate