Atheist Ireland AGM followed by public meeting

Absolam

looksee wrote: »

Yes, that is a better analysis, but any reference in the constitution to respect for religion does suggest that blasphemy laws would be necessary.

Only if the reference were one which required the populace to respect the mores of religions, or something similar? That the State is obliged to hold the name of Almighty God in reverence doesn't mean it's obliged to ask or demand anyone do the same.

looksee wrote: »

As an aside, I have no wish to see other people's ideas indiscriminately derided, but the opportunity to put the opposing view or point out the irrational bits should not be forbidden, any more than religious observation should not be forbidden. I am free to say that religious belief is nonsense in the same way that religious people are entitled to say I will burn in hell.

That's true, which is reflected in the fact that whilst the State is obliged to make blasphemy punishable by law, it can set out it's definition and conditions of blasphemy in such a way as to make it practically impossible for anyone to be prosecuted for exercising their freedom of speech in that regard. I'm inclined to see the legislation as a 'work-around' that observes the Constitutional requirement until that part of the provision is repealed, whenever that may happen.

Peregrinus

looksee wrote: »

As an aside, I have no wish to see other people's ideas indiscriminately derided, but the opportunity to put the opposing view or point out the irrational bits should not be forbidden, any more than religious observation should not be forbidden. I am free to say that religious belief is nonsense in the same way that religious people are entitled to say I will burn in hell.

I'm no defender of the Irish blasphemy law but, for the record, I think it does leave you free to say that religion is nonsense. To commit blasphemy, you have to say something "grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion" rather than in relation to religion itself (and furthermore you must do so with the intention of causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of the religion concerned, and you must succeed in causing that outrage).

Stealthfins

Is Michael Nugent still the leader of Atheists in Ireland ?

robindch

Stealthfins wrote: »

Is Michael Nugent still the leader of Atheists in Ireland ?

Michael Nugent still chairs the advocacy group Atheist Ireland:

http://www.michaelnugent.com/about/

Hotblack Desiato

Stealthfins wrote: »

Is Michael Nugent still the leader of Atheists in Ireland ?

No, because atheists in Ireland do not have a leader.

Of course Robin's answer is also entirely correct. Those atheists who chose to join AI have chosen a chairperson of AI.

Peregrinus

I, for one. welcome our new atheist overlord.

Absolam

Hmm. What would a modern PC rendition of overlord be?

Peregrinus

Absolam wrote: »

Hmm. What would a modern PC rendition of overlord be?

Ubermod.

Absolam

Uber sounds a but racist/fascist, but mod could be sufficiently non trigger-ish alright.

Perhaps equamod?

robindch

Peregrinus wrote: »

Ubermod.

J'approve.

recedite

Absolam wrote: »

Uber sounds a but racist/fascist, but mod could be sufficiently non trigger-ish alright.

Perhaps equamod?

How about Aquamod?

Powerful, with an arsenal of searing logic, but in a non-threatening, gender-vague sort of way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIBLgLNLX2g