A great deal of scientific research isn't absolutely conclusive
Ha! I realise that. Interesting that you now realise it also. If you are going to say 'the evidence says...' in response to someone's point and basically close the door to their viewpoint on 'scientific' grounds, then you need to present a case for the reliability of that evidence. You didn't - and in fact seem to have a shaky grasp on exactly what it was you did read. And it is an interesting bypath to the discussion that I would contribute to another thread about if you care to start one, but is not central to the point here really because the central point seems to be that humans are predisposed to believe in something but don't have to - something we could both make use of in different ways.
There are good reasons for thinking we could never be like Ireland - even Ireland could never be like Ireland again. Catholicism has rightly taken a battering, has radically changed and has lost the old footing. Even if it were the dominant religion in the UK, it wouldn't come close to being like Ireland twenty, thirty years ago. The C of E arguing for a more conservative approach on various issues (bearing in mind the open letter re homosexuality in the news at the moment) is not evidence that anyone wants to be 'like Ireland'. That has all the logic of a conspiracy theory.
mammouth Sorry your experience was so crap. Anything badly done is better not being done. It's no reason not to do it well.
chilli Read the JR report...you do realise there are plenty more like it.
mathsmum You're not getting my point at all and I wonder if you even want to try. No matter what position you adopt, even if it is a position of deciding that it is not possible to know, that is not a neutral stance because human being are literally incapable of making meaning and looking for explanatory theories (I could provide a lot of articles to back this up from my academic research but please, please don't make me because I don't have an athens password just now and it would take ages...). Suffice to say, a small child will listen to a sentence and use what they know about the grammar of how a sentence works to identify the likely meanings of each word. Groups of people dream up weird and wonderful stories to explain everything. Folk stories, spontaneous combustion, old wives tales - we don't stop. Now we've gone all post-modern and got disillusioned with meaning, we have a new 'theory' - that is all means squat. Even if you leave that decision there and proceed on as usual, it's still a position that is likely to inform your outlook and choices on some level. Atheists who feel sure enough to believe in the non-existence of a God are exercising an element of faith (yes they are) in reaching this decision because no conclusive explanatory theory for existence (at least, not one that satisfies everyone) exists either way.
Everyone encounters these questions and the desire to know, or not to know, or at least to think and decide what you do think, is a spiritual process - it is where some people encounter faith and in a Christian country, the Christian faith should be recognisable to everyone should they wish to take it further. It won't be recognisable as a living faith unless it's part of school life because faith is not really a lesson to be taught anymore than netball can be taught sitting down, it exists in the worship and in the praying.
But ultimately this is a pretty pointless discussion because no one's going to budge an inch.
jasper I'm saying the decline in moral standards and the rise of other less desirable things (like internet porn available to young people) is part of the picture, yes.