TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 9 °C Thursday 23 May, 2013

Column: Ireland needs to become a fully secular state

Everyone is free to practice their religion – but that shouldn’t have anything to do with how we run the country, argue Nathan Wheeler and Sean Cassidy.

Nathan Wheeler & Sean Cassidy

THE SPANISH philosopher George Santayana famously said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” In Ireland we need to remember this apt phrase. When we look through our modern history there are many areas where we can see the exertion of power by the church over the state, its politicians and its people.

The source of religious institutions power began with the drafting of the Irish Constitution in the mid-1930s when many Catholic Church groups made submissions that tried to increase the power of religious institutions. These submissions can be seen to have had a direct effect upon the final draft.

This was most apparent with the special protection afforded to the Catholic Church and a number of other denominations, though this was later removed by referendum in 1973. However the constitution still contains religious references in its preamble as well as articles covering education, the family and oaths of office that must be taken by the President, Judiciary and members of the Council of State.

When religion is given the weight of constitutional assurance this can give religious institutions an unchecked and awesome level of influence in society. If we look through our past we can see a number of events where religion has had a negative effect on society. In 1950 Catholic bishops railed against the ‘Mother & Child Scheme’ put forward by Noel Browne and saw the resignation of an innovative minister for health and the collapse of a government. In the 1990s we saw the uncovering of the physical and sexual abuse that took place in the church-run State childcare institutions since the 1930s. We can see from our past that we need to separate the influence of religion upon our politicians and our state. There is a need for a secular constitution and for a secular state in modern Ireland.

Secularism is the separation of church and state institutions. The secular movement does not require anyone or any group to justify their theological point of view. The secular argument is not with the religions of Ireland but with the State, whose responsibility it is to provide a fair and equitable country for all its citizens. Currently one of the paramount difficulties with providing a secular movement is that the only groups that actively campaign on secularism are atheist organisations.

Don’t have to be an atheist

This is a challenge for working towards a secular state because many people are confused between atheism and secularism. The problem with an atheist movement that campaigns for secularism is that it cannot facilitate dialogue with their religious counterparts, and risks turning the argument for secularism into a debate on the value of religious belief. This approach taken by atheist groups is detrimental to real engagement on the issue. You can have belief in a religion and a belief in secular values. You do not have to be an atheist to understand the value of secularism!

The concept of a completely secular state would not see the destruction or erosion of religious belief. Rather it would embody a state where its citizens are free to pursue a religious or a non-religious point of view, unimpeded by the state. The state would no longer give preferential treatment to religion, nor exempt individuals and organisations from the equal rule of law. This would rather give the space for individuals of all creeds to grow their beliefs based on their own values and not the values imposed on them by the state.

Our past is ripe with examples of the negative effect that too close a relationship between the church and the state can have on our society. We must remember this and ensure that there are limitations put on this relationship. Although there is a decline in religious belief, there is no certainty that religion will not regain its place of power in society. There is a hunger for social and cultural change in Ireland. To ensure that Irish society doesn’t suffer from relations between religion and the state ever again then the question on whether people want a secular state must be put to the ballot.

The value of secularism is best described by Mahatma Gandhi, who said:

If I were a dictator, religion and state would be separate. I swear by my religion. I will die for it. But it is my personal affair. The state has nothing to do with it. The state would look after your secular welfare, health, communications, foreign relations, currency and so on, but not your or my religion. That is everybody’s personal concern!

Nathan Wheeler and Sean Cassidy are co-founders of the DCU Secular Society. The group was founded in 2012 and campaigns for a secular constitution and a secular state in Ireland. Information on the DCU Secular Society can be found at their website or by emailing dcusass@gmail.com.

Read: Cardinal appeals for abortion referendum – but minister sees no need>

About the author:

Read next:

Comments (80 Comments)

  • Well put. The last person I heard advocating such a position was an eminent German theologian, Jurgend Moltmann. It’s only theocratic Catholics , such as those here, that don’t see it’s as much to their disadvantage as it is to the State for each to be in bed with each other.

    Reply
    • I’ve read some lousy articles on this site, but this has to be the biggest load of crap to appear on it yet. And that’s saying something. People need to accept that the Catholic church aren’t going anywhere and it’s only a select few who kick up a fuss. Mainly the minority who want idiotic things like same sex marriage and abortion. Let’s see how smart you are when you have to explain your evil ways before God.

      Reply
    • John you really are pathetic

      Reply
    • But the catholic church doesn’t respect other points of view, that’s where there the issue lied. I can’t foresee a change in the special relationship in the next few decades as “the church” still exerts its power and control over a large swathe of politicians merely by the virtue that they are catholic. I think it’s going to take a new generation of politicians to finally rid us of this ugly beast.

      Reply
    • Today from now on can people please ignore John Daly and all his pronouncements. He’s only trying to get a rise from people (which isn’t very Christian btw)

      Don’ feed the trolls.

      Reply
    • Poor John, if you really knew how outdated your comment is…. I have a long winded ( non offensive ) reply but it’s nearly 8 am , I have to go the end of my garden as I have a fairy fort ( and fairies) there, I play hide and seek with them for about half an hour each morning ( there devils to find) after that I am off to feed my dragon and unicorn, the best of friends they are ( hard to believe yes) then breakfast … After breakfast I will watch as my neighbors do the most hilarious thing, they go to a huge building a Pray to an entity calL ed… Wait for it…. GOD, I know mad init… People believe in anything.

      Reply
    • Niall 28/08/12 #

      @John hop in your time machine and piss off back to an Ireland ruled by animals who struck fear into the hearts of every person. The church is a dying beast and fossils like you are a rarity these days, thankfully.

      Reply
    • @John, while I respect your right to practice your religion, I have to disagree with you. This country was still stuck in the 19th century while other countries successfully separated church and state. The Catholic Church’s meddling in secular affairs effectively kept this country under the religious cosh,and we suffered as a result. We know the church in Ireland isn’t going anywhere. But in this day and age,they have no right to meddle in affairs that do not concern them.

      Reply
    • The reason that some perceive a Catholic influence is simply because so much of Catholic teaching is common sense. Some things are true even if they are stated by people you don’t like.

      Reply
    • The Catholic Church’s power and influence is dying. And thank f*ck for that. But there is one religion that is growing rapidly in Ireland, Islam. Its very popular and right on to slate the CC, but I have yet to hear of an Irish secularist slating Islam. Islam is a million times worse than the Catholic Church.

      Reply
    • Kevin, the difference between Catholicism and Islam in this context is that Islam hasn’t had this country kowtowing to it to the extent the Catholic Church has. Yes, Islam is a growing religion here, but until it impacts on the decisions the government makes, you can’t compare them both.

      Reply
    • Exactly, same for most religions, but and you don’t need anyone to preach common sense to you, their agendas always creep in.

      Reply
    • @johndaly…I think you are the one who will have to answer before your God for by believing and supporting this nonsense you are supporting the rape of the natural world.

      Men of power have committed attrocious acts in the name of Catholicism including genocide, rape, torture, racism assisting war criminals to escape justice and all for two things…more money and more power.

      YOU are the disgrace here…hang your head in shame.

      Reply
    • Please stop replying to the troll John Daly. He is feeding off of the attention.

      Reply
    • Well good luck to Catholics in Ireland in this secular world could be worse than penal times oh have we forgot that little part of our history. Remember the reason why the Irish remain distinctly different to the British was because of our religion catholicism believe it was one of Cromwells commanders said ‘we would have crushed their spirit if it wasn’t for those damn rosary beads’. I am not overtly against a secular government but if you look at most societies it is atheistic agendas which seem to control. My main point is religion has not been an entirely bad force within our society and in many ways we should be thankful to our ancestors for their brave commitment to faith which kept our identity.

      Reply
    • Lee Kelly, thanks, I really am!

      Reply
    • @John
      Just a heads up John, there is no god, so there is not point condemning those who have different views to you to a place that doesnt exist.
      I am an atheist and believe in morality, I believe in the worth of being a responsible citizen and the value of civic pride and appreciation. I find the wonder in a beautiful sunset and the laugh of a child. I abhor crime and injustice and believe I am important cog in the running of society. I believe you have the right to have your beliefs and traditions and would march against those who try to take those choice from you or would try to harm you because if them. But because I am an atheist you would condemn me to what you believe is an endless existence of pain and retribution because the deity you believe in so strongly allows you to.
      Why?

      Reply
  • Secularism: freedom of religion and freedom from religion.

    Reply
  • Agree totally with this article, but for any of this to happen we would first have to see either our government hold a referendum on the issue. I don’t see them having the backbone to do that, or the church allowing them to do so. The other possibility is that the church somehow sees sense and voluntarily relinquishes the power and control it has in this country, can’t see that happening either, those with power generally want to hold onto it.

    Reply
  • Ireland should be a secular state like America or France. We would probably need to rewrite large bit of the constitution. Its odd how a nation like the UK with an official state religion the Church of England is not a deeply religious society at all but the USA with constitutional measures ensuring separation of church and state is one of the most religious places in the world.

    Reply
  • Fantastic article and well put. Religion and politics should be well separated as both together have been the cause of destruction among Irish people. People were uneducated and lived in fear of the church who were responsible for their education, religion been their main subject.

    Reply
  • One’s religious practice or lack thereof is purely personal. In an egalitarian society there is no place for religious institutions pushing their belief systems as ‘the truth’ onto everyone else as the two main Abrahamic religions (Islam and Christianity) insist on doing. A religious institution or denomination having undue influence leads to all kinds of corruption as we know to our cost. Ireland is a very long way from becoming an egalitarian society. Having a secular constitution is a start.

    Reply
  • I am in complete agreement with this well written article. As an atheist I can still see the comfort and benefit some people get from their religion. There is no issue with personal beliefs. I do have major issues when religion has influence over government policy and seeks to infringe on individual choices and rights. It’s sad that people feel the need for a god it’s sadder still some would seek to force their delusion on others.

    Reply
    • Paul, you say you have no issue with personal beliefs but then feel the need to refer to them as sad and delusions. I agree with the authors in terms of the need for secularism but also in their warning that wrapping it up in anti-theistic disdain for religion will get you nowhere.

      Reply
    • Couldn’t agree more with Kevin. If you have no issue with people’s personal beliefs Paul as you claim, why dismiss them as “sad” and “delusional”? Too many people who claim to be liberal and have tolerance have very little tolerance of those who disagree with them, which doesn’t help the secularist cause at all.

      Reply
    • Aoife 28/08/12 #

      @ Ryan: It’s not inherently intolerant to describe a religion as “sad” or “delusional”. This whole concept that left-wing people (I’m using “left-wing” to avoid confusion caused by the differing American and European concepts of “liberal”) are tolerant of everything but intolerance is an overused canard that fails to take account of the differing natures of tolerance and intolerance. To be tolerant is to respect others’ beliefs and opinions – and, thus, being tolerant does not impede other people’s rights to their own beliefs. To be intolerant is to *not* respect the right to hold other beliefs and opinions, and thus intolerance impacts on other people and impedes their ability to live their own lives.

      As a result, it is impossible for a tolerant society to be tolerant of intolerance, because then it will no longer be a tolerant society and instead become an intolerant one.

      To add a concrete example to a rather abstract discourse, Paul may be criticising religion above, but he is not attacking the right of others to believe it in. It’s entirely possible to disagree with a belief, and even to consider it “sad” or “delusional”, while still respecting others’ rights to hold that belief and without wanting to suppress it in any way. It would only be intolerant if he suggested that religious belief should not be accepted, or that religious people should be considered in some way lesser, which he hasn’t.

      (For the record, I’m not religious, but still wouldn’t use those words to describe any religion.)

      Reply
    • Aoife 28/08/12 #

      Apologies for the wall of text, by the way, but this is rather a bugbear of mine.

      Reply
    • Aoife , to give an extreme example, if Paul had been a Catholic who declared his secularism and followed up by saying “it’s sad that all you atheists don’t have souls and are not fully human though” would you still consider him a “tolerant” person or accept these as “tolerant” views. I wouldn’t.

      Reply
    • Aoife 28/08/12 #

      “Not fully human” would be a pretty severe judgement, but unless it’s accompanied by a call for a restriction of rights based on the atheist’s supposed lack of humanity I wouldn’t describe it as “intolerant”. It would be an extremely unkind and judgemental thing to say, but that’s different.

      Reply
    • In fairness to Paul, his statement is fairly accurate, the definition of delusion is “an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument” – If that’s not what religion is, then I don’t know what is.

      When comparing that to someone saying that “atheists don’t have souls and are not fully human” – OK, the not having a soul bit is accurate (wtf is a soul??) , but the not fully human bit , that’s slightly inaccurate and pretty ridiculous.

      Reply
    • Brian, I’m sure if you use facile dictionary definitions of mental disorders you can attribute them to others arbitrarily. Unfortunately for you the APA specifically places the proviso that delusional beliefs are not beliefs that are “ordinarily accepted by other members of the person’s culture”. Even if they didn’t include that in the definition , as I’ve explained before on this site, delusions are generally indicated by detachment of the individual from normal meanings/use of concepts, interface problems with the community and a preoccupation with the belief that only the self exists. As a religious person I’m fairly confident I don’t display any of these characteristics.

      My example of “not fully human” was a statement attributed to Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor which many atheists (and most people in general) were rightly offended by. The point of this example was to show that a religious person expressing such disrespectful comments would be widely condemned yet Paul’s disrespectful comment is met with green thumbs aplenty

      Reply
    • censored 31/08/12 #

      That was a bit of a smartypants answer Kevin. “Facile dictionary definitions” indeed. Are we in humpy dumpty land now?

      Here’s the difference: they made up the concept of a “soul”, and their view of what is human is actually inhumane. By contrast, describing those nutters as delusional and brainless is a factual description.

      Reply
  • Mjhint 28/08/12 #

    As an atheist I too feel there should be separation of church & state. While I feel the majority of christians in Ireland do not force their religion on me a small minority including those in power do. We need to make sure that any politician that may be christian or other is not influenced in his work by his religious beliefs.

    Reply
    • mattoid 28/08/12 #

      Totally agree – like many others on here I’m an atheist who has no problem whatsoever with the religious beliefs of others. Even if I personally think they’re a little misguided I respect their choice and can see the strength some people get from their religion.

      Although I see no problem with discussing religion with them I would never seek to force them to conform to my own opinions or tell them how they should live their lives – that’s their free choice, just as mine is mine.

      All I ask is for the same respect to be shown towards those with other religious beliefs or with no religion.

      Unfortunately many (not all) religious seem to be incapable of doing this, and religious bigotry is sadly a phenomenon all over the world, an extreme case being the rise of Islamofascism.

      A wise lady once said to me that regardless of religion or otherwise, if you live your life treating others as you would like to be treated yourself you can’t go too far wrong…

      Reply
    • I agree @Mjhint but the problem is that the christian belief system means that a person is not being a good christian unless they are trying to convert or ‘spread the word’ to non-believers. A politician with christian beliefs therefore, will be influenced by his/her beliefs intrinsically. They will either be a good politician and a bad christian or vice-versa, it’s a no win situation.

      Reply
  • A secular state is good for all. Everybody religious and non religious are treated the same, also it’s time to tax the churches.

    Reply
  • So when can we go to the pub if we wish on Stephens day, Easter, good Friday etc…?

    Reply
  • A fully secular state…….amen to that!!!

    Reply
  • Whenever I hear the Angelus I’m reminded that the simpsons are starting over on CH4.

    Reply
  • Excellent article.

    I actually think that a firmly secular constitution and the removal of religious from school boards could actually be a positive for religions. Putting the focus on religious/spiritual development back on churches (as opposed to schools) would, I believe, actually strengthen the connection between churches and families in their faith. Secular constitution/laws/education would mean that fair and even laws are developed. People would live by the law of the land and, where appropriate, observe the requirements of their faith. People could be devout followers their own faith but it would mean that the principles of no single faith were imposed on people of other faiths, or no faith. Naturally, the law won’t always mesh with religious belief – for instance, Mormons would not be allowed to engage in polygamy. While something like same-sex marriage might clash with some faiths, this is a non-compulsory opt-in institution: if it’s against your faith, you don’t have to marry someone of the same sex.

    Keeping the Constitution and Government free from religion is a safe way forward. The malign influence of the Catholic Church in the past cannot be repeated. We should also look, for instance, at countries governed by Sharia law to see how devestatingly dangerous the power of one faith above all others on a society. Follow your religion but do not impose it on others.

    Reply
  • While most rational people would be quite happy with a secular State even with a religious vast majority, I do not believe the two can coexist indefinitely. Genuine secular countries tend to be irreligious. While America was a country found on secular principles they are being strained daily. The same can be said for Turkey. While everyone is entitled to religious freedom and freedom from religion, society must embrace an intellectual criticism of religious belief and those who argue of the social consequences of religious societies.

    Reply
  • Religion does three things quite effectively: Divides people, Controls people, Deludes people. The Catholic Church or Catholic Corporation as I call it,is amongst the most corrupt institutions to ever exist. The actually are a contradiction of there own dogmatic beliefs.They have more assets than most countires why not sell 90% of them to help poor people in third world countries? They treat women with contempt and as for the disgraceful sexual abuse cases around the world they really have lost any legitimacy.They only get defended by there pack of deluded brain washed Jesus Junkies who areathe most hypocritical self righteous morons you could encounter.The State should always be separate from any religious institution period.

    Reply
  • Ireland unlike the United Kingdom is a secular state. It became secular on the foundation of the Free State. Bishops are not appointed to the senate like they are in the House of Lords nor is our head of state the chief of the state religion. The RC Church has a voice like all other lobby groups and it will continue to lobby. Religions were ‘recognised’ in the constitution till 1973 but that did not give them any formal political power.

    With the decline in formal religions it brings a proportional decline in their power and influence. Thus this is a non argument put forward to massage the prejudices of those with little else to occupy their mind. To quote our President “Bankers whipping up fear”.

    Reply
    • In some respects, we’re more secular than other states, but we’re still not completely secular. Don’t all Dail sessions start with a prayer calling on TDs to be inspired by God in their actions? Aren’t oaths sworn on a bible? Why does the state broadcaster play a bell tolling twice daily for the angelus? Why does the state happily pay teachers to indoctrinate kids into one faith or another during school time? Why did the state protect the RC church from bankruptcy in the face of multiple lawsuits from sexual abuse victims?

      Our constitution’s opening lines are “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…”.

      We’re not a theocracy, but we’ve a long way to go before we’re secular.

      Reply
    • Smiley 28/08/12 #

      So why are chairpeople of school boards usually priests? Why are they allowed unlimited access to conduct practices for communion et al during school time?

      Reply
    • Isn’t’ hostility to all things religious a product of the common or garden recalcitrance which is characteristic of the jejune phase of apostasy? Why should it bother anyone when a bell rings out? One can opt not to swear on the bible, one can opt out of religious education in school as many kids do these days. The elephant in the room and the big question is why is one not happy in non belief and what makes them hostile and juvenile when it comes to religion? It is reminiscent of the hysteria of McCarthyism but now we have Revs under the bed.

      Reply
    • I didn’t mention whether these things bothered me or not, I merely presented them as arguments refuting your assertion that Ireland is a secular state. As it happens, the angelus doesn’t really bother me, but children’s impressionable minds being indoctrinated into religions during school time and at the taxpayers’ expense, does.

      Reply
    • I don’t think many people have a problem with the bells ringing out, it’s the fact that the church don’t pay for it that bothers people, why should non-believers have to pay (via their TV licence fee) for such nonsense at peak viewing time? One can opt not to swear on the bible in court alright, but as a defendant it mightn’t be the safest option, as a non-believer could be unfavourably prejudiced against. And the options for opting children out of religious education aren’t much good in most cases, as there’s no supervision or alternative studies offered to the children who choose to opt out.

      I look forward to the day that Ireland becomes a fully secular state, one that treats ALL people equally.

      Reply
    • Ah the old narrow minded ‘my money’ argument proves that the religion of begrudgery reigns supreme. It is our state religion and its angelus bell rings out to inoculate ‘impressionable minds’ with intolerance. I’m sure one is more pleased at having to pay ‘bank bond holders’ or to support people who were unable to control their desires and who were bereft of the wit to calculate the affordability of their mortgages. Replace religion teaching with indoctrination by bankers. Oh wait… wasn’t it ‘mature minds’ that were susceptible to that type of indoctrination. The simple fact of the matter is that one is free to ‘take or leave religion’ in Ireland and that is a priceless freedom. If the cost is the pealing of a bell or the chance hearing of a message of peace and love then it is worth every cent. Moreover Ireland doesn’t force atheists to sing God Save the President!

      Reply
    • censored 31/08/12 #

      No. The Catholic church is an evil institution which has dealt untold damage to our country and society. It’s not something that can be passively ignored, especially while they still have control of our educational system.

      Reply
    • Censored one would have to ignore mountains of evidence that contradict your opinion in order for your opinion to be considered valid. I suppose you want try and censor (hide) this evidence from everyone in the hope that they will ignore it and blindly follow the ignorami.

      Reply
  • @conor, true about the US. Lots of proxy cultural wars there to ensure opression by the religious right continues. few countries seem to get this right. Getting religious indoctrination and supposed ethos out of our national schools would be a start.

    Reply
  • Education and religion have a long, long way to go. Dismissal of staff for not following the”ethos” of the school and compulsory religion classes for those of other or no faith are part and part of education today. Over 90% of primary schools are still owned by catholic organisations. So future generations remain in the hands of the religious orders.

    Reply
    • Compulsory religion classes for those of other or no faith? Nonsense. Please specify instances where students of other or no faith have been compelled to attend religion classes in Catholic schools.

      Reply
    • Paul 28/08/12 #

      @Tertullian, in any denominational school kids of other and no faith have to stay with their classmates unless there are enough staff to withdraw them. They may or may not be taking active part in the lesson but they are not free to leave. This situation is even worse in years when catholic schools are preparing children for confession, communion and confirmation as indoctrination has to be ramped up significantly.

      Reply
    • @Richard Coady,
      Its simply untrue that school pupils are forced to take part in religion classes. Speaking from my experiences these kids were always allowed to use the time to do other study. Irish Catholic schools are known for their inclusiveness to all religions. they simply opt-out of religion class. Public religious schools exist because there is a demand for them. Its quite logical really.

      Reply
  • Its an interesting debate and in general I’d be in favour of a secular constitution although I do wonder whether it would make a huge difference to our society. The assumption that a secular constitution will create space for peoples’ religion outside of the state apparatus is a bit naiive. One only has to look at the US whose “founding fathers” deliberately separated church and state in their constitution to see how religion can still come to dominate the political scene.

    The US has finally elected a black president. At some point in the near future it will probably elect an Hispanic president or a female president. But I reckon it will be a long while before you ever get an openly athiest or non-religious president.

    Reply
  • ever wonder how much priests cost in our secular state?

    Salaries paid to priests in defence forces, gardai, prison service, health sysem and VECs to name but a few.

    Here’s an article on how much they cost the army…

    http://www.atheist.ie/2011/09/the-price-of-sky-pilots/

    Reply
  • Ireland will never have a secular constitution because it’s politicians simply don’t have the balls or the inclination to make such a change, they will always put their own electoral futures before that of the state or the people. The malign influence of religion and in particular catholicism on the outdated Irish constitution is an embarrassment in the 21st century. It was written by men who at a time when women were merely for breeding and rearing children and priests and bishops had the power to get you locked up in a state gulag if they decided you were ‘immoral’ or in many cases just unlucky to have been born out of wedlock. The sexual abuse cases and the inhumane treatment of women, children, the elderly and the disabled by the religious orders and their lay people with the connivance of the state and many of the Irish people who turned a blind eye to what was going on is a good example of why the state must never allow any religion to ever have the sort of power the catholic church was given in Ireland after independence. Even today Ireland is still being ruled by this religion, they run the schools, teacher training colleges, most of the hospitals, care homes and their influence on social policy is still preventing Irish women from having the choice when it comes to abortion. Sadly Ireland will never shake of the yolk of Rome because there are still too many people attached to it and too many politicians who are afraid to stand up to them. Thing is they can still have their religion and they can worship fairies in their back gardens for all I care but keep religion out of the affairs of state and out of the schools especially, if people want to bring their children up in a religion then do it in their own time.

    Reply
  • While most of our society today is not influenced by religion, there are still many instances where it is. As already mentioned, education is heavily influenced by religion, even community schools which are meant to be secular generally have a christian ethos and students are forced to attend mass once a year in a lot of schools from my understanding of talking to people that went to community schools. I’m personally religious but I in no way would expect that to be apart of state life, people should be able to choose the religious or lack thereof environment they live in. Schools with a religious ethos should not be funded by the state, as it is in the US so that all religions are treated equally.

    The ban on alcohol consumption on Good Friday should be lifted, as for one it halts all those businesses for a day and people actually end up drinking more as people queue up outside offlicences on the Thursday before stocking up as if they’ll never be sold alcohol again.

    I’m not an atheist and I do not want to live in an atheistic society but I don’t want to live in a society where religion is imposed on myself, my family, and everyone else.

    Reply
  • The authors look like Father Ted extras :D

    Reply
  • The american founding fathers were mostly deists. They did the work and set up something that could have been beautiful . Within a few decades after the declaration of independence the Christian nuts had airbrushed Tom Paine out of history and re-wrote it so that Washington and Franklin were devout Christians. Now the country,outside the big few cities, is become akin to the taliban in their fanatic lunacy ! Church has no place in the affairs of state. In Ireland De Valera destroyed the country with his allowing the church to control affairs. Now we are paying the price! Religion has no place in the governance of a country . Sadly it will probably always have as people don’t understand the lies they are being fed !

    Reply
  • The problem with the Secular ideal is that it is often subverted by people who think “Secularism? Wahey, let’s destroy religion!”

    My only question is as follows:

    In a hypothetical secular state there are four politicians.

    One is a committed Christian with strong affiliations to a church who freely admits that his moral code is molded and to a certain extent dictated by his faith. His actions and behaviours are strongly dictated by that moral code.
    A second is a moderate Christian with no particular church affiliations who freely admits that his moral code is molded and to a certain extent dictated by his faith. His actions and behaviours are generally dictated by that moral code.
    The third is a committed Atheist who has a moral code of his own choosing and adheres to it, he freely admits that he thinks religion and religious people are imbecilic and his actions show this.
    The fourth is born again, his whoopin’ and hollerin’ embarasses everyone, everywhere, he applies his new found morality wherever and whenever he sees fit.

    Where do they stand in this secular state? Should the state do anything in particular to deal with their political involvement in the state?

    This is just a question, it isn’t a “trap”. I’m genuinely interested in people’s opinions.

    Reply
    • Mjhint 28/08/12 #

      That is a fair accessment of the problem. However my view of a secular state is one that makes rules based on the needs of all its citizens. They are all taken into account on every piece of legislation. Also that state garuntees that a person can practise any religion they wish to or even hold any opinion they wish to. However religion or atheism does not interfere with governance of the country. The purpose of a modern society is to cater for all. Not an easy task but one that we should aspire to.

      Reply
    • Democles all 4 people you depict would be obliged to enact laws based on evidence. In a secular State laws must be based on evidence. The law makers would be perfectly entitled to express their beliefs in public if they wished but they couldnt be used to justify non evidence based legislation. In a secular State religion and Atheism is off bounds neither can be promoted. Religious neutrality does not equate to Atheism.

      Reply
    • Mjhint, if you’ll excuse the “joke”, that sounds a lot like the Lib Dem manifesto, appropriate to all, failing to cause detriment to none.

      “The purpose of a modern society is to cater for all. Not an easy task”, An impossible task I would have thought.

      Fundamentally the beliefs people deeply hold, or deeply do not hold, are an essential part of who and what they are and how they behave. In order to function politically in a secular government it would seem that participants would be required to put aside part of who they are, particularly if they wish to hold executive power.

      Cyril, it’s Damocles, when you say “evidence based” what do you mean? Do you mean from a purely empirical standpoint?

      Reply
    • Mjhint 28/08/12 #

      I have said not an easy task. Impossible? Maybe your right I dont know. Should we at least try? In my view yes. Maybe you think thats niave but to not try is just plain lazy.

      Reply
    • Religion is destroying itself it does not need help from the outside. Most people who really question “faith” reject it.

      Reply
    • censored 31/08/12 #

      Yes, “all 4 people you depict would be obliged to enact laws based on evidence”

      However, how could you trust the religious ones to actually do that? What if the priest/bishop or whatever tells them different?

      It’s too artificial to confine the choice to these four. You certainly wouldn’t vote for somebody just because they’re an atheist. That’s necessary but not sufficient.

      Reply
  • The role of the Catholic Church in telling people what to do has not been removed, rather more usurped by the vast overweening nanny state and ‘elf ‘n’ safety nazis intent on legislating for every facet of human behaviour.

    I dont know which is worse.

    Reply
  • Resel 28/08/12 #

    I expected john daly to reply by now.

    Reply
  • We have all these religious references in our constitution yet we also have a government that closed the vatican embassy. Also look at Enda’s Cloyne speech and Ruairi Quinn’s education reforms and you’ll soon see that the constitution isn’t stopping a secular approach in Ireland.

    So while I would like to see a secular constitution I don’t believe it’d make any difference.

    Reply
  • People interested in this discussion, and in the religion-secular interface, may be interested in a new documentary I made for RTE Radio 1 ‘From Belief to Unbelief’ which goes live on 13 Oct 2012 at http://www.rte.ie/radio1/doconone// Joe Armstrong

    Reply
  • We should also watch out when we talk about “tolerance” … for the Sharia clashes in many ways with our european laws. While we can be tolerant when it comes to religious “beliefs”, we cannot tolerate things that go against our laws, like violence against women. Our law should without any exception be above religious practices, and no judge should for example give a muslim man a lesser sentence for beating up his wife with the excuse that this is part of their culture… (has already happened in Europe). As Aoife said, we can’t be tolerating intolerance.
    One can quit Christianism and become an atheist without any major consequences, but quitting Islam can become your death sentence (Anyone who doubts that this is a violent, intolerant and backwarded religion shoud read “Infidel” by Ayaan Hirsi Ali).

    Reply

Add New Comment