Talk:Religion in Spain
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Sections
This article needs to be seperated into clearly defined sections to make it useful for Wikipedia. Augustgrahl
- Done --Error 16:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reliable Source?
Under the "TODAY" section, there is a claim that 99% of Spanish university students are atheists or agnostics. These seems dubious...as does the source. Apparently it was taken from the magazine "Commission" (although no specific citation is given). From what I researched, that "magazine" is published by a missionary Baptist organization, whose articles on country conditions generally end with a request for donations to help evangelize the population. This should probably be removed, unless someone has a reliable source for the 99% figure. --Anietor 06:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Dear Anietor,
Why do you think that the comparision with The Netherlands is incorrect? Both Statistics Netherlands and "Centro de Investigaciones Sociológias" are the most reliable sources. My intention with that comment is to help to stop the topic, especially in north Europe, about the conservative Spain, which is no longer true.
Can you explain me your acction?
Best regards, Marjolijn van der Hijden. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.60.164.248 (talk • contribs)
- See response in Talk:Spain, where this issue was first raised. --Anietor 23:21, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Pre-catholic religion
What about religion before Christianity/Catholicism? --Pewpewlazers 06:08, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Religion in Spain is different from this old article. muslems are growing and jews are coming from northern europe to retire in the southern coast or to raise kids . this article seems more like Catholic Spain... As for jews we are 34000 at last count. Why dont you contact the israeli embassy in madrid for the FACTS. Each time the wiki is OFF, it makes folks think to go elsewhere HOWEVER I always say WIKI is great cause WE can correct it and update it. raquel samper murcia jewish center —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.121.4.98 (talk) 17:39, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] First paragraph
I think that the first paragraph could be much more impartial:
"Spain, it has been observed, is a nation-state born out of religious struggle between Catholicism and, in turn, Islam, Judaism, and Protestantism." - Is this an opinion? I think religion was an important factor but absolutely not the only one.
"the secular constitution of the Second Spanish Republic imposed a series of anticlerical measures that threatened the church's very existence in Spain" - Well, maybe the government could have done that, but not the constitution, in my opinion. At least there should be a link to the text of the constitution, so that everyone could see it. Anyway "threatened the church's very existence" is too much. You could say that during the Civil war, but not under the constitutional republic.
"...Jews, Protestants, and other nonbelievers"? Implying that Jews and Protestants are "nonbelievers"? IMO should be changed to indicate "non-Catholics" or some such. Gr8white 05:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Well, yes...they are nonbelievers. The term is used relative to the Catholic Church. Jews and Protestants made up the largest 2 groups of nonbelievers (in the Catholic faith). The term is not inaccurate or offensive. That's not to say that non-Catholics, as you suggest, wouldn't be accurate as well. --Anietor 05:47, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- "The term is used relative to the Catholic Church." Yes, I'm sure that's what was intended. But as I read it, used without qualification, it could definitely be considered "offensive" to a religious believer who is not Catholic. Any objection to changing it to "non-Catholic"? Gr8white 18:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Just to clarify my point - I don't object to the term "nonbeliever" per se. I'm one myself. The problem I see is the the term has an established usage with a specific meaning in a religious context. So if the term is intended to have a different meaning it should be explicitly stated. The sentence as written jumped out at me when I read it though after examining it I understood the author's intent. But it's precisely this type of language that is used by some groups to marginalize others.
Note the term "heretics" would be accurate here also - those others are "heretics" relative to the Catholic Church - but I think you'd agree that wouldn't be appropriate. Gr8white 23:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)