I have mentioned the Global Atheist Convention that is to be held in March next year. What you may not be aware of is the Parliament of World Religions that Melbourne will have the honour of hosting at the start of December this year.
I think this is probably a good thing, the more that we get these warring ideologies together the greater likelihood that we will move away from the extremes of each religion towards a more centrist view.
My concern here is that they are getting government subsidies to the tune of 4.5 million dollars. It is planned that the event will attract 8000 attendees and will feature Cardinal Pell and Rev Tim Costello as Australian guest speakers.
Compare this to the Global Atheist Convention which is being subsidised to the tune of … nill Australian taxpayer dollars with an expected 2500 attendees and a number of high profile intellectuals such as Richard Dawkins and Peter Singer
The speakers in attendance at the Atheist convention are donating their time for free, the convention being solely funded by ticket sales.
An how do some of the religious view Australian Atheists getting together? Here’s a comment from Cathnews reporting on the convention:
It is surely the time for the Church to join with conscientious atheists and agnostics, along with cultural Catholics, to present to Australian society the good done by the Christian religion and in particular, the Catholic Religion.
The drum beating and flag waving of the New Atheists, illustrated by the appearance of Christopher Hitchens at the Opera House, is going to continue and just as in the 1960′s, when the New Order was drafting the younger generation and forming them into an army of relativism, the Church will again be sidelined if, as it did nothing in the 1960′s, it does nothing to counter the false messages and images of Richard dawkins et al.Fr Mick Mac Andrew, Bombala NSW
To which I replied and Cathnews posted:
I think it’s great that Australian non-believers can meet and network amongst others of like mind. To campaign for separation of church and state (to the benefit of all) to discuss how we might combat the extremes of religion and how we might better work with those of faith.
Perhaps, Fr Mick, it’s time that we all got together to realize that Catholics/Christians, Muslims etc don’t have a monopoly on good will or social justice.What have people of Faith to fear?
And please people Hitler was a committed Christian. Neither Atheism nor Theism will motivate a person to acts of good or ill. For that you require an ideology, whether it be religious or non. Ideology can be manipulated by those who sit at the top to selfish ends and it often is.
Why not come along to the conference instead of casting stones from the sidelines?Sean the Blogonaut
We are perceived as a threat. We are cast as a destructive force.
Is there any stronger indication than the privileged place religion has in Australian society? Is this not an argument to do your best to support the Atheist conference either by attendance or raising awareness? If we don’t define ourselves in the public arena, then we are left with a caricature one determined by those with an axe to grind against us.
Related posts:
- Parliament of World Religions – Attendance underwhelming There were claims of 10-13000( I noted this on the...
- Nazi popes, Earthworms and Tax dodges If you have been following any of the Global Atheist...
- Global Atheist Convention – Sold Out It’s roughly six weeks out from the convention and the...
Loading ...
Who the Hell wants to listen to George Cardinal "GO TO HELL" Pell. Tim Costello is OK; at least he goes to Indonesia to help. Pell does not.
Well I'll be at the Atheist Convention fighting for the eradication of the Poison called Religion.
Great comment, Sean. I don’t suppose we’ll be seeing a contingent from Cathnews turning up, though.
I would hope there would be some religiously inclined individuals there besides the nutters from Catch on Fire ministries protesting out the front
Really the moderates do need to step up and representB)
I can't believe the government is funding these tosspots. I mean there's nothing like impartiality… I will expect the next atheist convention in australia to be funded likewise. And cathnews don't get me started.
The implication of the funding is that any attempt to decrease social disruption from religious groups is so necessary that significant funding provides a return on investment to the community, and that the disruption costs the community at least $4.5 million.
The corollary is that increasing the proportion with atheist and agnostic positions would also decrease the problem of religious conflict… and that events promoting atheism would be a good investment (it's rare that a convert to unbelief recants the unbelief, and therefore the problem of social disruption from that individual is solved once and for all)
An analogy to the current situation would be that rather than funding to promote non-violence, funding is going to promote increase in gun ownership or carrying of knives while advocating use of rubber bullets and shorter blades.
Dear Atheist, are you not aware that atheism is a religion? You believe that God does not exist. You guys are smart enough to know that requires faith. I believe God does exist, therefore we have two opposing world views. Now, to cut to the chase, the arena of conflict is in the science: does science support evolution or creation? Your high priest, Richard Dawkins has recently conceded that an intelligent designer, other than God was most likely responsible for the evolution of life on Earth. Possibly martians from another galaxy. Go see the documentary “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.” He takes this position because he knows that life cannot make itself – the biochemistry is humungously too complex. I believe the book of Genesis, and the science confirms this. By the way, when asked in an interview (“Frog to a Prince”) to give one example from science that demonstrates a mutation adding information to the genome, Richard could not answer the question. The interview is on you tube. That’s because there is no evidence for mutations adding information and therefore no evidence for evolution. How can nothing make everything? If you believe that, you’ve got more faith than me. Enjoy your church meeting in March.
Dear Atheist, are you not aware that atheism is a religion?
Hi Creationist, the name's Sean by the way, see there at the top of my blog. I believe that your particular definition of a god(not just yours but all gods) is a figment of human imagination. Now I am defining belief in the sense that belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true“.
I hold the proposition that no gods exist to be true based on the absence of any credible evidence. I hold many beliefs, I believe that I wil awaken tomorrow (based on the evidence that I have done so for the past 30 years), but I may not. I have a belief that Carlton will win the premiership next year (some may say this is a faith position ) I believe that circles are round, that gravity will hold me to the earth. Holding beliefs does not make one religious. Holding a particular belief, following particular creeds, performing rituals usually defines religion.
Interesting that you label Dawkins our high priest, as if you feel that would be a derogatory title(revealing, no?).He's a good scientist and great science communicator, high priest is stretching it.
Your high priest, Richard Dawkins has recently conceded that an intelligent designer, other than God was most likely responsible for the evolution of life on Earth. Possibly martians from another galaxy. Go see the documentary "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed." He takes this position because he knows that life cannot make itself – the biochemistry is humungously too complex. I believe the book of Genesis, and the science confirms this.
Now you know this isn't the case, you are making a little fib, which I understand is a no no under the 10 commandments. If ID theory is true it says nothing about what the intelligence behind creation might be, Dawkins indicated that he thought an alien designer was more probable than the storm god of the Israelites. But then of course you have the problem of infinite regress ie who designed the designer. To present this bit of hypothetical postulation as his position is a falsehood – so either you are lying or you are ignorant (willfully so I believe).
By the way, when asked in an interview ("Frog to a Prince") to give one example from science that demonstrates a mutation adding information to the genome, Richard could not answer the question.
Funny I have seen some uncut versions of that video and heard Dawkins speak about it. Creative editing.
How can nothing make everything?
So we have gone from evolution to abiogenisis to different theories covering two different questions.
If you believe that, you've got more faith than me. Enjoy your church meeting in March.
I think I have several things in greater quantity than you do education, intelligence, wit, charm, imagination but faith in a fairy tale is not one of them.
Oh church I get it, ooh that was clever, be honest that took you an hour to think of didn't it? Or did you just copy and paste cos thunking wos too 'ard for ya.
You are kidding yourself if you believe religions coming together will be a good thing…… If anything this blog post makes you look naive. The problem in Australia is that politicians do deals behind the backs of the electorate with religious people, whilst the electorate seems oblivious to this happening: Just note how they support the current regime of the religious left Rudd who is now breaking ground with his open Moral talking points and the religious right as represented by Howard. Australia is in dire threat of being completely hijacked beyond the point of recovery by secretive religious cabals, and yet newspapers and journalists do nothing. Absolutely nothing for fear of their lives. In addition the electorate keep voting like they are attending take away joints..how easy and lazy to vote for the ALP, the Liberal Party and The Greens. The country hillbilly shitheads rape urban people with their religious bigotry while stealing their taxes with massive payouts and protections, forcing Telstra to serve them. The electorate of Australia are asleep to these changes, as illustrated by the simplistic blog post that completely misses the point.
Oh really – naive? Simplistic hey? Have you read the rest of my blog or are you just content to take one line of one post stretch it out to mean something that fits your preconceived notion of what is wrong with Australia in regards to religion.
You sir, sound like a windbag conspiracy theorist, heavy on the rhetoric but very light on the facts. Does Religion have a disproportionate affect on our society – I do think so. Are secret deals done – probably (see the Exclusive Brethren). Does the Catholic Church seem to have protection from investigation over systemic child abuse – yes.
Australia is in dire threat of being completely hijacked beyond the point of recovery by secretive religious cabals, and yet newspapers and journalists do nothing. Absolutely nothing for fear of their lives.
Care to elaborate with some facts on this one?
Michael Bachelard still seems to be alive and kicking. The recent creation of Eternity, a Christian newspaper formed because the founders thought Christianity was not getting a fair go in the press make your vitriol look a bit silly.
The thrust of the post is to get readers thinking about religion's privileged place in Australian society and suggest they combat it by attending the convention. You seem to stop reading at the point where I said that the Parliament was probably a good idea.
On the one hand it is in the open – I as an unbeliever could attend it. Getting different religions to sit and talk may mitigate their extreme tendencies, further alienating and removing support for the fringe groups. On the other hand I suppose their is a danger that they form a loose coalition and decide to pressure government for political concessions. But again it was not the thrust of my post to discuss in depth the pros and cons of the parliament.
The electorate of Australia are asleep to these changes, as illustrated by the simplistic blog post that completely misses the point.
I think you sir have missed the point of the post.