Are you sick of apologising for your faith?

[SongBiird]

At first I was thinking only as a Muslim but when discussing it with my friend who's Catholic she said she felt the same.

Instead of discussing the benefits of our chosen religions, our chosen paths in life (or right now, when discussing it with those who are not of the same faith or any faith we end up getting into debates about some of the things either a) people don't understand and thus take the wrong (often negative) way, b)other fanatics/fundamentalists/crazed nutters have done in "the name" of our faith c)how as a female we are oppressed in our faith.

There are countless other things that I feel I end up apologising for, or trying to justify; and I say justify because often, explaining isn't good enough!

Does anybody else find themselves in the same position?

Dawkins is presumably "noisy" because, as a high-profile speaker and writer on the subject, he is always being asked to do interviews. It's a bit like accusing Germaine Greer of being a "noisy" feminist.

Message withdrawn

Well Germaine Greer is a noisy feminist (or certainly was). That's one of the reasons I like her. There's nothing wrong with being noisy if you have something that needs saying. My point was only that not all atheists are going quietly about their business, just as not all religious people are standing on street corners with loud hailers.

The people you both mention are not typical atheists; they are spokespersons for atheism, or those whom the media have appointed as such. If there were none, then we'd continually be getting "Ha! no answer to that, have you?" type comments from militant theist knobheads like Theo Hobson in the Grauniad.

My point - that most atheists get on with it quietly because, to be honest, they don't even THINK about religion and superstition, it doesn't even enter their daily lives - still stands.

You are probably right about that UnquietDad. Most atheists most likely do just get on with it quietly without making a big deal about it. Just as do most people who have a faith. Some people are ranters, some aren't. It has nothing to do with whether they go to church or not.

Troublewith, I know some athiest's who will talk and reason, and you can discuss and debate issues. That isn't a problem, it's when it becomes the issue that when somebody commits some atrocity in the name of your chosen religion, you then have to explain over and over again, why you don't agree with it, and why your religion doesn't permit said act, and why you find such things abhorrent. It should go without saying, I don't agree with suicide bombers, I don't agree with Priests abusing children and it being covered up etc etc etc. but some people really want to drive you to condemn the whole bloomin religion. It isn't just athiests either. I've had Christians properly come at me really aggressively over stuff and I've had to say "well yes but the Oklahoma bomber wasn't Muslim". I can completely understand questioning, but I shouldn't have to keep explaining I don't agree and apologising for other people's crimes.

I agree though that most people really get on with their own lives and religion / non religion quietly without making an issue out of it. I also actually believe that religion is (and probably has always been) quite a contentious issue so it's better to keep it personal.

trouble - hmm, exact opposite experience here -for me it's the religious who want to shut down debate and close off questions, and the atheists who are quite happy to have debate and ask difficult questions (as long as it is genuine "debate" and not just answering everything with "well, because God says so" or "because that's just the way it is"... that's not especially helpful...)

Message withdrawn

UQD,

Have you seen [[www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/980525-DD-has-been-going-to-church-every-day this thread}}?

Can you spot the ranter?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/980525-DD-has-been-going-to-church-every-day

"Dawkins is presumably "noisy" because, as a high-profile speaker and writer on the subject, he is always being asked to do interviews. It's a bit like accusing Germaine Greer of being a "noisy" feminist."

Or the Pope of being a "noisy" Christian.

I think the problem is that atheists don't want to change people's benaviour or curtail their freedoms. They might want to change people's thinking but that's as far as it goes.

Some (please not ethe use of the the word some) religious people want to stop people doing things and make them change their behaviour. Non-Christians in Britain, for example, look at the growing influence of the Chriatian Right in America and are concerned - "when America sneezed, Europe cathes a cold" to quote someone.

You are correct that Christians want people to change their behaviour. Becoming a Christian leads to transformed lives, when previously important things become unimportant and fall away. It is totally natural for someone to change their behaviour when they become a Christian.

Absolutely - but the problem is that IMHO, Christians to have a tendency to expect other people to modify theri behaviour to fit in with their beliefs. Then they say (pace religion in schools) "But it's completely benevolent, so it can't do any harm. And anyway if you don't believe in it, it's just words so why worry about words"

I suspect they would just expect everyone to obey the law of the land (eg role of collective worship in the Education Act).

But they would also expect you to be respectful of their baliefs and of things that you know are important to them.

But why can't believers be respectful of my views as well? On the religion in schools thing I understand about the law of the land, but the law of the land does not require my child's teacher to teach them the christian faith as fact, rather than something that some people believe. And this happens in many non-chirch schools - there have been a zillion threads about it. And on those threads only a couple of Christians have ever been prepared to accept that I have a point!

I thought RS lessons were pretty standard, Seeker. It would be very tedious if every statement was prefaced with "Christians believe...", "Muslims believe..." etc. It is much more streamline to assume that you are talking about beliefs in RS.

You can only pick and choose to a limited extent when you send your child to a state school. They are teaching all the children, and not simply tutoring individual children according to their parents' wishes.

I have been teaching about the Big Bang theory recently and only mentioned that was a theory at the beginning of the lesson. It would have made the lesson very dull if I kept going on about it being a view held by only some people and not a law of science.

Seeker, my experience of believers (ones I know personally as opposed to the ones standing on street corners shouting "either you're a sinner or a winner") is that they are completely respectful of my views as an agnostic/atheist.

I have certainly never got the impression that they wanted me to change my behaviour or beliefs (apart from my Muslim cousin who suggested I convert because the schools are better, but I think she was joking).

I just can't see the point of making these generalisations which five seconds thought would show to be inapplicable to a huge number of people. It doesn't help.

Faith schools are another matter however.

'I think the problem is that atheists don't want to change people's benaviour or curtail their freedoms.'

If you say so.

Message withdrawn

Well firstly unquietdad I am sat here planning my lesson on scientology for next week, so while I agree that you can't cover everything I suspect we do more than people assume.

We also look at humanism and freqeuntly discuss atheism, although I would not call it a belief system.

I love talking about my faith , or any faith - religion fascinates me which is why I studied it at university( just as well really as it comes in quite handy for the job). Maybe spending my every working day with teenagers means I have quite a tough skin and I am not very easily offended.

I don't evangelise, perhaps this is because I have spent much of much of my time working in secular schools so I have to think very carefully before I speak and be very balanced. If someone asks me about my faith because they are thinking about becoming a Christian I will then tell them what I get from my faith. I know I am instrumental in my dp's decision to go to church and the same with dd.

You would work out very quicky that I am a Christian, but not because I am out on the prowl hoping to convert everyone but because my life is very much built around my faith. If you ask me what I do over the weekend , church is going to appear in there. I go to prayer groups etc during the week.

I hope I have never ever closed down a debate in the manner desribed by unquietda
d.
I do get frustrated when people have no intention of a debate and just want an excuse to call me a thick child abusing fool.

We're not talking - I thought - about atheistic regimes any more than you are talking about theocracies. We are talking about people. Tatalitarian regimes of any persuasion are obviously a bad idea!

"'I think the problem is that atheists don't want to change people's benaviour or curtail their freedoms.'

If you say so. "

Abride - would you care to elaborate?

MmmeRWandB - I wasn't talking about RS lessons in secondary schools - I was talking about religious practises in schools - in particular Primary schools