Do Atheists and Agnostics have a Political Identity?

[Aodh Mor]

This is a question I think has been growing in many countries I keep up with the news of lately. The immediate reason for me posting this is the death of Savita Halappanavar in a hospital here in my home country of Ireland, and the debate that has understandably resulted here.

For those of you who don't know, Irish law is considerably Catholic and Conservative in ethos, an understandable result of the 87% proportion of the country who claim to be Catholic (according to the 2011 Census, Central Statistics Office). An example of this is our confusing law surrounding abortion, where it is not an offence to travel abroad to secure a termination, or to get or give advice about where to find such a service but it is illegal to carry out an abortion in this country (which has even caused a proposed abortion clinic in Northern Ireland - where the practice is legal to be downgraded to referral and contraceptive functions). There have been other laws brought about by the Catholic Ethos of our 1938 Constitution - such as the ban on married women in the civil service, which includes teaching and medicine, only removed in 1973(!?) and a complete ban on same-sex marriage and illegality of sodomy.

The point to this diatribe is that I'd like to know other members' opinion on whether or not secularists and humanists (who lets be frank, tend to be atheist or agnostic) should lobby as a political group for the reform of denominational education systems and backwards laws in countries where the separation of church and state has been achieved only symbolically?

[Enzo]

Communism!

[Manco]

Why organize as atheists and/or agnosts, when liberalism (in the broadest sense) already has the exact same ideals without getting religion involved?
Most Christians already agree with most atheists/agnosts on these matters, which points to not religion being the dividing line in these issues, but rather culture and education.

[Aodh Mor]

the problem is that on certain issues, where a theist's identity as a liberal conflicts with their genuine faith, which is one thing the long abortion argument in Ireland has made very clear to me

[atheniandp]

the problem is that on certain issues, where a theist's identity as a liberal conflicts with their genuine faith, which is one thing the long abortion argument in Ireland has made very clear to me

You do not need to be a theist to know that abortion is murder nor do you need to agree with abortion to be a liberal.

[Aodh Mor]

Perhaps this is a problem limited to Ireland, because of our long history of the church interfering in our politics, but what I'm trying to point out here, is that religious organisations in Ireland (and several other countries, the US being an obvious example) are allowed to wield a huge amount of political power, why then is there this taboo towards Agnostics having a similar franchise-ment?

The Irish Supreme Court has already ruled that Abortion in the case where a mother's life is in danger is should be put into law, but 4 separate administrations since that ruling have failed legislate the required laws - in spite of mountain pressure from the EU, because of a fear they would run foul of the Catholic vote, which make up the majority of the country.

And please, don't change the subject, Abortion isn't the issue to be argued here, it's the disparity between Agnostic/Atheist people and Theists in terms of political representation. Not all Catholics believe abortion is wrong, but it can't be argued that the political influence of the catholic church has been a driving force behind the political movement behind it, so by the same logic in your post Catholics shouldn't organise politically, because not every catholic agrees with the majority opinion. The deviation of portions of a large group do not cancel the existence of a majority position within that large group.

Personally, for me the biggest issue with this wouldn't even be abortion, but denominational education.

[Mangalore]

You do not need to be a theist to know that abortion is murder nor do you need to agree with abortion to be a liberal.

If we'd actually know this supreme courts wouldn't write page long treatises about it and when, how or why what may be done.

I don't know if it is murder. I do know that it is putting women into a big morale dilemma and regardless of classification under a great deal of stress because it is not a clear cut and easy thing to do.

[Elfdude]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/17374733/W...-and-Agnostics

Communism!

lol. I'm glad the opposition is so... intelligent.

[Manco]

It's not changing the subject. All Catholics who disagree with the Church are wrong according to their own beliefs, though they might fool themselves into thinking otherwise. They still disagree however because you can't devolve such complex issues and the people involved into a black and white atheist vs (in this case) Catholics.
A Catholic isn't solely defined by his religion, and religion apparently isn't THE dividing line, and that's why there's no need for this kind of dichotomy when other movements already espouse the same ideals.

[Deathless]

Since murder is legal terminology involving unlawful death. Abortion where it is legal would in fact, not be murder.

[G-Megas-Doux]

Those without any religious beliefs set their own world view from experience and observation. They make decisions on what they believe is fair and right. This is the same as everyone else does even those who have religious beliefs. Hence you find those without religion tend not to be united under a great banner. The one disparity there is when a political group of one form or another tries to mobilise and swing such people to their view point. Example communism.

Have no firm views on religion?
Think your lot in life is drudgery and unfair?
Is the man keeping you down or a certain group?
Well we have the answer .....

People who have yet to make a decision of firm conviction can be swayed hence swing vote in politics. Those without established beliefs have either rejected view points known to them or not completed thinking on it. As such many different paths are open to them and can lead to separation rather than an agreement of thought.

Alternately like most people I've met they just think everyone else is wrong and they or their small group are right.

Hope that is more on topic to your query about non believers not being organised.

[Treize]

Wait, your country actually considers anal sex a crime?!

[Irishman]

Absolutely. Laws only supported by a certain ideology or religion which are not acceptable to other religions or ideologies should not be passed or acceptable. If a case cannot be made for a law in terms of public reason (to borrow a term from Rawls) then the laws should not be valid.

This shouldn't be a point just for secularists though, anyone should be able to see the danger of allowing a certain religion's morality to be enforced on others in a pluralistic society.

Wait, you country actually considers anal sex a crime?!

No sodomy is legal in the Republic of Ireland, as are homosexual civil partnerships.

I think the OP is a little unfair to the state of Irish politics. Over the past two decades there has been a huge shift away from Catholic conservatism, in fact the society is much more liberal in general than many parts of the US. (Some 58 percent supporting full homosexual marriage rights.)

[Himster]

So allowing pork when there is a muslim minority in the country would be an unacceptable legal proclivity?

[Irishman]

So allowing pork when there is a muslim minority in the country would be an unacceptable legal proclivity?

Not sure if this is directed at me. No quite the opposite. Public reason asks people to justify laws in reasons regarding the basic fundamental rights of citizens rather than with reference to a specific doctrine that others would not share.

So in arguing whether abortion should be legal, appealing to the rights of the fetus would be fair game, appealing to the bible would not.

[Col. Tartleton]

Liberal Conservatism.

[Elfdude]

Liberal Conservatism.

No.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

I don't think the abortion debate has much to do with religion these days. We are fast becoming irreligious. I am a catholic on the census, I am an atheist though, and I know of a lot of people like this. 47% of Irish people consider themselves "religious", whatever they understood that to mean, although there are a lot of religious people who don't consider themselves "religious" in the sense of very dogmatic. Our Tánaiste (vice president/deputy prime minister) Eamonn Gilmore is openly atheist and he is literally the most popular politician in the country. Try doing that in America.

The fact is, there are a lot of irreligious people in Ireland who disagree with abortion. I am no one of them but they exist. There are also some religious people, particularly certain protestants, who think it should be legal. Also, you are factually incorrect, abortion is regularly done here to save a mother's life.

[Matthias]

In the US? No. The Republican Party has catered to conservative Christian religious extremists for a long time, so much so that one could say that it has become intertwined with their political identity, but atheists/agnostics support Democrats more as a reaction to this sort of identity politics than because Democrats present themselves as their party.

Considering atheism/agnosticism is not a belief system, it would be tough to have a political identity with what is surely a disparate group in many ways if their only unifying factor is a lack of belief.

There are quite a few atheists/agnostics that voted for the Republican Party despite being demonized by it because they have other priorites they agree with Republicans on.

[Aeneas Veneratio]

We don't have a poltical identity. You can find Atheists and Agnostics from the far Left to the far Right, and everywhere in between. As for abortion, I personally feel that after the early stages of pregnancy, it should not be allowed to get it. You have like 3 months / 12 weeks to decide, whether you want it or not. It should be enough for people to make that decision within that time.

In the US? No. The Republican Party has catered to conservative Christian religious extremists for a long time, so much so that one could say that it has become intertwined with their political identity, but atheists/agnostics support Democrats more as a reaction to this sort of identity politics than because Democrats present themselves as their party.

My main problem with American politics, while I agree with the Republicans on many of their ideas for the state and the economy, they alienate me with their strong religious belief. I am content that I live in a country, where none of the bigger political parties are considered religious.