Is it possible for atheists and theists to discuss their world views without one ooh t of view or the other feeling anything along a scale from dissatisfied to furious?

[BertrandRussell]

Theists get patronising, then defensive, atheists get exasperated, then angry. Is there another way? Or is it just completely impossible and not even worth trying?

I don't quite understand your point there rebel. Isn't it consistent to worry about the conflict btn working to save a prem baby in one room, and aborting the same age one in another? I'm not sure we can talk about the life/choice debate without a lot of distress though. I for one am not prepared to go there. I am glad it has never been a choice I had to make.

And there has been a lot of honesty on the thread, Westray.

can then turn round and treat the next 23 week old foetus or live born baby as a human being.

That is staggeringly offensive. Both to the medical professionals without whose brilliance, innovation, and absolutely tireless care few to no very premature, sick babies would survive. And to the parents who terminate pregnancies for medical reasons (almost no non-medical terminations happen at this point) and who have to go through the heartbreaking process of receiving catastrophic diagnoses and having to decide whether to continue much-wanted pregnancies or not - taking into account the impact on their future child as well as their own physical and mental health.

What is your purpose in posting on this thread? Is it to advance the idea of a mutually respectful discussion between people of faith and those of none; or was it to list the ways you think non-Catholics are dreadful and how unfair it is that your children can't grow up untouched by any information not totally in sync with Catholic teachings?

I have probably stepped over my own self-imposed line here of trying to be open and trying to understand others' views. But I honestly can't get my head around it.

Can I ask how many 23 week abortions people think happen in the U.K. every year?

I don't quite understand your point there rebel. Isn't it consistent to worry about the conflict btn working to save a prem baby in one room, and aborting the same age one in another?

What conflict? Do you think they will forget whether it is an abortion or a premature baby they are dealing with?

"Isn't it consistent to worry about the conflict btn working to save a prem baby in one room, and aborting the same age one in another?

As it is almost certain that the abortion will be of a baby with a condition incompatible with life, or a pregnancy which would kill the mother if it continued, then I don't see the conflict. Both situations need skill and compassion and care and understanding. All the things you want from a medical team.

As a Catholic you can certainly behave how you like. Presumably if you are a good Catholic you like to follow the teaching of the church. If, as many catholics do, you find these are at odds with your personal morality, however you arrived at that, you can choose not to follow it. Everyone's morals/principles are influenced by their experience. For people with a religious faith, that almost certainly includes listening to the teachings of the church. But if a person cannot articulate the reasons for their views without referencing merely a summary of a religious standpoint ("abortion is wrong"), then they really should be thinking more deeply, and examining their own conscience more fully.

Obviously, in the eyes of the church you are not supposed to go against the teachings. But there are many, many bad catholics, and I assume people of other faiths, who believe in their God, and act according to their conscience.

My reason for posting was that Bertrand was giving the reasons she (Sorry I don't know your gender) feels christian privilege was impacting in her life,
I gave some ideas how I feel atheism was impacting on mine.
You've all got offended so I'll go back into my hole and stop saying what I think. Like I do in real life.

This is why we get suprise election results, because we ask people what they think and they can say (by voting) what they are not allowed to voice.

'Atheist rubbish' I automatically apologised because I offended people.
I apologise for offending people.

(I hope all the atheists out there think theism is rubbish. Because that is a consistent world view. I don't find it offensive.)

I have come across where pro life beliefs could conflict with doctors was in the Sally Phillips documentary about abortions and Downs Syndrome. Some women felt pressurised to abort. Equally a woman, I know felt pressurised to have a late abortion as a young offender with mental health difficulties.

I don't know how, exactly, any religious belief / or lack of it would have affected these cases though. These cases were reported through a very personal perspective of each woman for each case. Some argued, on here, that Sally Phillip's reporting was skewed due to her Christian beliefs, though.

I cannot think how atheism is impacting on my life. I think schools should be secular, which IMO is entirely compatible with a personal faith.

I didn't watch the Sally Phillips programme. Did she reference her faith? Or did she argue solely from the perspective of the mother of a child with Downs Syndrome?

"I gave some ideas how I feel atheism was impacting on mine.
You've all got offended so I'll go back into my hole and stop saying what I think. Like I do in real life."

No, don't do that! It's just that some of the things you said were actually factually incorrect. And I really don't know what you mean by your children being taught atheistic rubbish and I really want to know. And you can be a pro life atheist, you know!

isittheholidaysyet you talk as if atheism is a faith, has an agenda, a doctrine.

It's has none of these things.
You can't teach atheism, there is nothing to teach.
Atheism is a lack of faith, nothing more.

And you certainly haven't offended me. I thought one of your comments was pretty offensive to medics though, but I'm sure you would agree once you thought about it.

I think schools should be secular, which IMO is entirely compatible with a personal faith

I agree but my perception is that society (in the UK) has become more polarised. My parents practise(d) a faith but were also secularists. Their faith obligations in addition to secular law not instead of it. They were members of the Secular Society (which was then a distinct identity aside from the Humanism). There were relatively few areas of real conflict to address in this model and they were not unusual in their views and I grew up seeing the two as complementary - both had a lot to offer.

There seems to be less acceptance of the ability to balance the two now which may be connected to a rise in evangelism on both sides of the divide. Or maybe just less acceptance that it is possible.

TheFallenMadonna, no she did not reference her faith but was visibly very upset, talking to a woman who had decided to abort due to a high Down's risk.

I should add, from what I remember.

I think there's a problem simply because too many people (many of whom should know better) don't understand (or wilfully misrepresent) the word 'secular'. The US is a secular country with secular state schools!

Bertrand, from the many posts of yours I have read on many threads, I knew you would be the least likely person to be offended.

(Which is meant as a compliment, in case it doesn't come across!)

She didn't reference her faith. But it was referenced in every article about it. It was a shockingly unbalanced programme. Outrageous to call it a "documentary" "Personal Story" would have been fine.

"Bertrand, from the many posts of yours I have read on many threads, I knew you would be the least likely person to be offended."

So what did you mean by your children being taught "atheistic rubbish"?

^'Atheist rubbish' I automatically apologised because I offended people.
I apologise for offending people.^

Well, no, it was rude and dismissive, but not offensive. At least, I wasn't offended. I'm not surprised that you think atheism is incorrect; I think Christianity is misguided and the Christian god made up. But I would refrain from calling Christianity 'rubbish' to a Christian, I hope, because it's not polite and not conducive to a mutually respectful discussion.

I thought your remarks about not being able to trust medical professionals who are willing to perform abortions were offensive to professionals who devote their professional lives to saving lives and coming up with better ways to save those lives, by suggesting that they wouldn't stretch every nerve to save a tiny preterm baby simply because they have also performed mid-term abortions, usually in quite harrowing circumstances.

I understand that you wanted to provide a counterpoint to Bertrand - though she was in turn answering a 'how does religion impact your life' question.

From my reading of your posts you sound like you object to secularism rather than atheism - ie the idea that all faiths and none are presented and treated equally (or as equally as possible). Have I got that right? I got this mainly from your posts about your children's school - that you would prefer your children not to be exposed to the idea that not everyone believes in the Christian god (and that's ok), that Sunday isn't a holy day for everyone and that churchgoing isn't universal (and that's also ok) and that people have different belief systems apart from some fundamentals (ie 'be nice to each other' as a fundamental, 'no contraception' of something specific to your faith).

I agree with the poster who advocated secularism - a level playing field for all, with no beliefs/lack of elevated above any other, and where we are all exposed to each other's beliefs (or not) as valid, so long as they affect others as little as possible.

Sorry- there was meant to be a thank you and a smile between the two bits of my last post!

I think people are keen to attribute a moral viewpoint to a religious faith even when it is not used in an argument. I suppose I can see why, although it can be irritating if you want to discuss your own opinions rather than those of the church.

That's the thing though isn't it, TheFallen? People's views are judged through the filter of any publicly declared religious belief. And Sally Phillips campaigned against Down's being given as a medical reason to justify late abortion. You can see how people felt her religious belief leads to a particular bias. But to say she cannot campaign would be equally wrong, in terms of allowing religious beliefs equal standing with non religious perspectives.