Cyprus-Forum.com

[GreekIslandGirl]

I have not being interviewed yet, but my parents did, and apparently the interviewer did not ask them what their religion is and he took the liberty to fill this option himself, probably assuming that they are Christian Orthodox.

In context, that could be a cultural thing. I know the older generation find it insulting to be asked about their religion. The interviewer may have sensed what your parents were by all sorts of other hidden clues. For example, maybe your mother was wearing a crucifix? Maybe some icons around? Maybe your parents used langauge with religious connotations, like "Panayia mou"; "O Theos na mas voithisy" etc

[humanist]

atheist you have the right not to believe. Though am confused as to what voice you want out there. There are a lot of things I question about Christianity and Islam , but I hold that as my views and have no need to share with others.

[souroul]

since when did not having a religion.... became a religion

[kurupetos]

Atheists are usually badly-endowed people, who are angry at God.

[supporttheunderdog]

Atheism may not be a religion but it is a religious point of view.
I do not know whether or not there is any sort sort of alleged supreme being or creator (an agnostic position) but if there is I very much doubt it is anything like any god in any human religion as for the most part most such gods are probably made in Man's image. Gods were otherwise a very convenient way of explaining what man could not then explain, in particular natural phenomenon, or as a means of imposing power structures (the divine right of Kings) and/or thought control, eg as in Iran where disagrement with the government can be an offence against god punishable by death.

Any religion that has to impose itself by force (eg 16th century catholicism and the Inquisition) or certain verisons of islam are in my view religions with a problem.

That said if some one wants to worship one particular version of god, providing they do not try to force their views on others but are prepared to be tolerant of alternative religeous points of view , including Atheism, I am not going to try to argue with them.

[Atheist]

Given that religion in Cyprus is not forced upon adults, and students are allowed to excuse themselves from anything religious at school (from what my wife the secondary school teacher tells me), I cannot see what the problem is.

Aren't the religion courses still compulsory? Can students excuse themeselves from all those courses without being penalized and without affecting their grades?

[Bananiot]

In all my years as a teacher, I have met noone who was excused from RI in any school in Cyprus. On top, evolution is still not part of the curriculum of the 6th form lyceum pupils who take biology for the Pancyprian exams that lead to university entrance. I think I have written this before, recently in a single classroom in Larnaca, I counted 16 icons of saints!

[Atheist]

Atheism may not be a religion but it is a religious point of view.
I do not know whether or not there is any sort sort of alleged supreme being or creator (an agnostic position) but if there is I very much doubt it is anything like any god in any human religion as for the most part most such gods are probably made in Man's image. Gods were otherwise a very convenient way of explaining what man could not then explain, in particular natural phenomenon, or as a means of imposing power structures (the divine right of Kings) and/or thought control, eg as in Iran where disagrement with the government can be an offence against god punishable by death.

Any religion that has to impose itself by force (eg 16th century catholicism and the Inquisition) or certain verisons of islam are in my view religions with a problem.

That said if some one wants to worship one particular version of god, providing they do not try to force their views on others but are prepared to be tolerant of alternative religeous points of view , including Atheism, I am not going to try to argue with them.

I agree with you in general which is why I call myself "atheist/agnostic". Unfortunately the term "agnostic" on its own is interpreted by some to mean the belief that an existence of God, even one as described by religions, is equally possible as the non-existence of any God. What I believe is that religions have already been proven wrong by science and the existence of some vaguely defined "supreme being or creator", while it can not be disproved is just a theory that is no more possible than any other theory that people can imagine (for example the "Celestial Teapot" that Bill mentioned earlier)

[Maxx]

Atheism may not be a religion but it is a religious point of view.
I do not know whether or not there is any sort sort of alleged supreme being or creator (an agnostic position) but if there is I very much doubt it is anything like any god in any human religion as for the most part most such gods are probably made in Man's image. Gods were otherwise a very convenient way of explaining what man could not then explain, in particular natural phenomenon, or as a means of imposing power structures (the divine right of Kings) and/or thought control, eg as in Iran where disagrement with the government can be an offence against god punishable by death.

Any religion that has to impose itself by force (eg 16th century catholicism and the Inquisition) or certain verisons of islam are in my view religions with a problem.

That said if some one wants to worship one particular version of god, providing they do not try to force their views on others but are prepared to be tolerant of alternative religeous points of view , including Atheism, I am not going to try to argue with them.

I agree with you in general which is why I call myself "atheist/agnostic". Unfortunately the term "agnostic" on its own is interpreted by some to mean the belief that an existence of God, even one as described by religions, is equally possible as the non-existence of any God. What I believe is that religions have already been proven wrong by science and the existence of some vaguely defined "supreme being or creator", while it can not be disproved is just a theory that is no more possible than any other theory that people can imagine (for example the "Celestial Teapot" that Bill mentioned earlier)

I think you got it slightly wrong in my opinion.

Agnostic could mean, at least to some, that God probably does not exist, and as Science really has not been absolute as to God's existence or not, then for most there is at least a very small element of doubt that their could be a higher deity. In other words, an Agnostic is someone who is not absolute about the non existence God, but can be up to 99% Atheistic.

I think most people who call themselves Atheists, are probably Agnostic instead.

[Atheist]

Atheism may not be a religion but it is a religious point of view.
I do not know whether or not there is any sort sort of alleged supreme being or creator (an agnostic position) but if there is I very much doubt it is anything like any god in any human religion as for the most part most such gods are probably made in Man's image. Gods were otherwise a very convenient way of explaining what man could not then explain, in particular natural phenomenon, or as a means of imposing power structures (the divine right of Kings) and/or thought control, eg as in Iran where disagrement with the government can be an offence against god punishable by death.

Any religion that has to impose itself by force (eg 16th century catholicism and the Inquisition) or certain verisons of islam are in my view religions with a problem.

That said if some one wants to worship one particular version of god, providing they do not try to force their views on others but are prepared to be tolerant of alternative religeous points of view , including Atheism, I am not going to try to argue with them.

I agree with you in general which is why I call myself "atheist/agnostic". Unfortunately the term "agnostic" on its own is interpreted by some to mean the belief that an existence of God, even one as described by religions, is equally possible as the non-existence of any God. What I believe is that religions have already been proven wrong by science and the existence of some vaguely defined "supreme being or creator", while it can not be disproved is just a theory that is no more possible than any other theory that people can imagine (for example the "Celestial Teapot" that Bill mentioned earlier)

I think you got it slightly wrong in my opinion.

Agnostic could mean, at least to some, that God probably does not exist, and as Science really has not been absolute as to God's existence or not, then for most there is at least a very small element of doubt that their could be a higher diety. In other words, an Agnostic is someone who is not absolute about the non existence God, but can be up to 99% Atheistic.

I think most people who call themselves Atheists, are probably Agnostic instead.

If how you defined Agnosticism was the standard definition then I would call myself agnostic. However that term has various interpretations (see link below) which is why I prefer to call myself "atheist/agnostic" as to leave no doubt about what my position is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism