Sir, – Theo Dorgan’s insightful article (Opinion, August 18th) highlighted the change from Catholicism to secularism that has occurred within a generation. Indeed this change is not necessarily progress as conformity remains.
Progress requires individuals to adopt not the current belief but their own. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – God bless Theo Dorgan – whether he wants it or not! – Yours, etc,
Sir, – I wish to congratulate Theo Dorgan for his balanced and fair piece (Opinion, August 18th). His lucid and balanced contribution sets out in clear terms the need to create an inclusive Republic where free speech and expression find a platform. A space where all voices can be heard and acknowledged without fear of being mocked and ridiculed. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Theo Dorgan (Opinion, August 18th) falls considerably short of expected standards by not elaborating on why Richard Dawkins is “dangerous” in his dogmatism. What a remarkable slur about a decent man, without any further support or clarification. At the same time, Mr Dorgan suggests we should not criticise the personal beliefs of others, while ignoring the very real dangers inherent in some of those beliefs. These dangers arise not from religious fundamentalism but rather from the fundamentals of religion, which in numerous cases offer breeding grounds for homophobia, genital mutilation of children, contempt for women, and divisiveness, generally. No such danger can be found in the texts authored by Richard Dawkins, et al.
To say that we have not gained anything if we exchange one exclusionary orthodoxy (the benighted worldview of pre-secular, theocratic society) for another (a scientific/secular worldview) is absurd on many levels.
Of course, crude mocking of people such as Katie Taylor is not something to be encouraged
However, Mr Dorgan seems to equate tolerance with a right not to be rebuked, which is simply untrue. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – John Waters claims that Katie Taylor’s belief in God makes interviewers squirm (Opinion, August 17th). As she is a Pentecostalist, one must assume that she adheres to biblical inerrancy, glossolalia, divine healing and the other defining characteristics of Pentecostalism. Television presenters and journalists are not the only people who squirm at such ideas, as opposed to public expression of a belief in a god. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Aidan Brabazon (Letters, August 18th) asks: “Does John Waters appreciate that from the perspective of an atheist, Katie Taylor might as well have said she accredited her success to the tooth fairy?” I am utterly fed up with this lazy comparison. Whether or not you believe in God, He is utterly sui generis, even as a concept. Even if nobody had ever told you about God, the idea of a supreme intelligence behind the universe would occur to you spontaneously. It is natural to turn to this putative intelligence with your petitions.
The tooth fairy is a myth specific to a particular culture. Nobody would pray to it, except maybe a child hoping to be compensated for a lost milk tooth. I think the fact that so many atheists compare God to the tooth fairy shows that they simply misunderstand the very concept of the Divine. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – What Aidan Brabazon (Letters, August 18th) appears not to appreciate is that the perspective of the atheist is an hermetically limited one. Neither does he appreciate that faith in the tooth fairy, apart from its immediate reward, matures into a more complete understanding of that being which leads, not to disappointment, but deep fulfilment. Belief in God is similarly vindicated, but immeasurably more so. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – For too long Ireland suffered from religious intolerance and one would have hoped we’d managed to put all that behind us. However, Aidan Brabazon’s “tooth fairy” jibe (August 18th), directed at Katie Taylor’s faith, suggests that we may have merely moved the shoe to the other foot. – Yours, etc,