Atheism

@eurocelticyankee,

No, i don't think that's wrong, but i'm not any kind of ultimate authority. Personally, in real life, this never impinges. It would idiotic to rail against religion in real life, because religions have a death grip on society. And by the way, this is the kind of thing which it was intended would be discussed here.

1 Reply

Having a meta-discussion on the what the topic instead of talking about the intended topic isn't much different than engaging the trolls. The product either way is the same.

I find this very much to be a part of my experience as an Atheist.

A
R
T

0 Replies

@msolga,

msolga wrote:

But for my part, I'd rather not continue with this,

Deal.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Yup.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

It's funny, I live in a Catholic country and boy like you said, do they have a grip on this society, EVEN after countless scandals. Now nobody I know is a practising Catholic, YET, we all get our kids christened, our kids all go to catholic schools. We have no choice, we step out of line and our kids suffer.
The joys of being an atheist.

1 Reply

I long participated at an Irish site, although i've not been there for quite a while. Someone started a thread about the ridiculous expense which had been laid out for a younger sibling's confirmation. It turned into a larger discussion of everyone's experience of confirmation, at which point many of the older members joined in (it was very much a young site). Not anyone i knew there was a practicing Catholic, but they all had that experience in common. In my own case, confirmation was the deal-breaking deal i made. I agreed to go through the ritual and make no trouble, on the condition that no one try to make me attend the mass thereafter. Everyone kept up their part of the bargain. The parish priest was really pissed when he figure it out . . . tough ****.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

You do know you'll catch fire if you enter a church again.

0 Replies

I've been avoiding that assiduously.

0 Replies

@eurocelticyankee,

Speaking of Catholic countries, has anyone wondered why Italy has the lowest birthrate in the EC? I'm sure there's no lack of sex (Berlusconi on his own is doing a good job).

0 Replies

I have read in more than one source that the fertility rate in industrialized countries is declining, and that it may be an evolutionary response to sufficient food and shelter options. Can't say if that's true or not, but it is an interesting thesis.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Quote:

That doesn't change the consequence of what you do though: The thread gets derailed even further, and it's even harder to get it back on track. Are you sure this is a consequence you want?

And what the hell are you doing ? Waiting for a bus ? MSOLGA is one of the polite people I respect here. I seriously considered leaving the thread by her request alone. Fat chance now.

0 Replies

@eurocelticyankee,

Quote:

All I can see is who can hurl the most abuse and contempt.?

Welcome to A2K. The regulars who have been here the longest abuse most newcomers for disagreeing with them. The newcomers either leave or return the abuse. Very little gets discussed in a proper fashion. Newcomers are trolls, old farts are good people....well in their minds anyway.

0 Replies

@eurocelticyankee,

Quote:

Is it wrong for an atheist to despise religion.

I dont know how you can despise anything unless it is out of fear.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

I think I'd read that there was a chemical compound common in packing(?) that had been shown to drop sperm rates.

I tend not to think it's evolutionary, because evolution isn't all that smart, selfish gene and all that. Developed world countries get plenty of food per individual compared to third world countries. I think it's more that developed world has more access to fertility decisions (e.g. contraception, abortion) - but it is odd that the most seemingly catholic country is more likely to make negative fertility decisions in contradiction of catholic doctrine.

3 Replies

@hingehead,

Solvents and glues are know to drop sperm count.

1 Reply

@hingehead,

It was male fertility which was alleged to have declined. I didn't see anything about an environmental cause, though. Impoverished agrarian societies need lots of children, because they provide labor, and they are the retirement plan for poor farmers--if your son survives to adulthood, you rely upon him to support you in your old age. Industrrial societies have made such transactions meaningless. The family doesn't need child labor, nor are the parents dependent on the children for their support in old age.

I find the entire scenario interesting, but i don't know that anyone has positively shown why the decreasing fertility rates occur. I think, though, that the religious aspect is meaningless. The Spanish, after all, are just a Catholic as the Italians.

1 Reply

Are you sure they have a low birth rate ? I was under the inpression they had ZERO POP GROWTH because of emmigration.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

It is interesting.

Apologies as I interpreted 'an evolutionary response to sufficient food and shelter options' ass about.

I though you meant our population was dropping because there wasn't enough, but now I think you meant that because there's surplus we don't need extra children.

That still sounds like an parental/social choice thing rather than an evolutionary response. If it was evolutionary you'd expect that 'surplus' was something that happened regularly in our biological history, and that there was a genetic advantage for individuals with the 'low-breeding' gene in times of surplus for us to be wired for it. And I can't think of a scenario where that would be so, given we were all arguably third world until the industrial revolution. But just because I can't think of one doesn't mean there isn't one.

0 Replies

@Ionus,

don't apply them to the penis and your odds go up.

glad I could be of help...

0 Replies

@hingehead,

Ah, found the article:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-28/sperm-quality-declines-after-exposure-to-plastic-chemical-bpa.html

First couple of para's

Quote:

Bisphenol-A, a chemical used for decades to make plastic food containers and baby bottles, was linked to lower sperm quality in men, researchers said.

A five-year study of 514 Chinese workers compared those with detectable levels of BPA in their urine, ranging from high to low, and those with undetectable amounts, according to results appearing today in the journal Fertility & Sterility. Men with measurable levels had two to four times the risk of lower sperm concentration, sperm count, vitality and motility.

This is the first human study to show a relationship between semen quality and BPA levels in urine, after animal studies showed similar associations, said De-Kun Li, an epidemiologist at Kaiser Permanente’s division of research in Oakland, California. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration said earlier this year that they will study the potential health effects of BPA. On Oct. 14, Canada declared the chemical a toxic substance.

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know