Talk:Religion in the European Union

message: Most of the article is stricly from West European point of view. It completely ignores situation of religion in politics and society in countries like Poland.--Molobo 17:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is about the EU as a whole, not about individual countries. —Angr 18:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: EU is made out of individual countries and this article presents a view that shows it as a single unified region in regards to religion and its role in society and politics.--Molobo 18:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is based on a short section from the European Union page which has been expanded with figures to hand. Feel free to expand upon it by giving a counter weight to examples from Western European by giving examples from Eastern Europe - though do note this is meant to have a union-wide perspective rather than just list each countries situation. I look forward to any contributions you bring, but please remember to cite considering the subject at hand. - J Logan t: 15:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is West-European biased 

message: Interesting article at EU Observer here on Barroso inaugurating a "European synagogue", not sure how we would fit it in here though. Anyone seen anything similar we can put it with?- J Logan t: 11:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synagogue 

message: May I remind Esimal that this is a serious educational tool, not a blog or reenactor community. Please provide a single source in regards to "Paganism" being regarded as a religion within the European Union. Otherwise you'd perhaps be best stuck to blogging. - Gennarous (talk) 20:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Paganism"

message: Since these figures keep getting altered /here and at European Union without citing sources, here are the figures for the individual countries (as available 2009). The total for 2009 is about 13 million. 
These figures are taken from 
*
 Muslim population of EU countries
Country       	Muslim population
Austria       	353000
Belgium       	281000
Bulgaria      	920000
Cyprus        	0
Czech Republic	1000
Denmark       	88000
Estonia       	2000
Finland       	24000
France        	3554000
Germany       	4026000
Greece        	310000
Hungary       	24000
Ireland       	22000
Italy         	36000
Latvia        	2000
Lithuania     	3000
Luxembourg    	13000
Malta         	1000
Netherlands   	946000
Poland        	48000
Portugal      	15000
Romania       	66000
Slovakia      	0
Slovenia      	49000
Spain         	650000
Sweden        	149000
UK            	1647000
Total         	13230000
 
--Boson (talk) 00:50, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Figures for Muslim population of EU

message: I modified the pie chart and checked back to the source for names.  I used different shades of blue to purple for the various forms of Christianity (Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Other Christian) and different shades of red to differentiate atheists from agnostics/non-believers (the survey differentiated).  I did lump together other religion and not specified since the total after lumping was small, 3%. --Erp (talk) 03:20, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  pie chart mods 

message: I think it's not written right. Most of information is based on surveys from some part of country. When you ask 1000 people it does not mean there is this percentual cut of this religion and that religion. In big cities it's completly different than countryside. It should be based on official census. Article says there is 12% of protestants, only German Evangelical Church and Church of England have nearly 50M members. I am sorry but I have to say: Eurobarometer is lying source! 
— Preceding unsigned comment added by LesanCZ (talk • contribs) 21:55, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreliablity of article 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Religion in the European Union's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Global Christianity":
From Protestantism: 
From List of religious populations: 
From Christianity: 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 23:10, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Religion in the European Union]] 

message: According to the chart there are 1.8%. This seems very out of date.
Better references are shown in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Europe
There the muslim population in the european union is shown with 3.8 percent as of 2010 (not mix up with europe, which is 6%). This correlated with a lot of other studies, ranging from 3-5%.
Today 2018 after the refugee crisis the population will be higher of course. But good valid data is difficult to find.
I would suggest to update in first step the chart to the same as in the other wikipedia article and then find a better source. It is important to show the correct data, so the public also see when minorities and religious groups need to be represented.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.147.163.231 (talk) 22:01, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong Muslim Population 

message: By all means remove the UK when talking about the EU as it currently is (since the UK is no longer part of the EU). However, I believe the UK's data from the two religion surveys on this page, conducted in 2010 and 2015, should stay. The UK was in the EU at the time that the surveys were conducted. The surveys don't claim to portray EU religion as it is in 2020. They claim to portray EU religion as it was in 2010 and 2015. And the UK's data in those tables will be useful to people who want to know what religion in the EU was like in 2010 and 2015, when those surveys were taken. Removing the UK from those tables is like the USSR airbrushing people out of photos. If a person dies, you don't digitally remove them from all your photos and pretend they never existed, do you?CyclingFan1234 (talk) 20:30, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The UK's inclusion on this page 

message: User:Trasz, this type of information about issues facing Christians in the EU is absolutely appropriate for this page and it has reliable reference sources. Just removing the text citing NPOV, comes across as nothing more than sanitizing the article. You can not just delete sourced statements on real issues facing a religious community, it's nothing more than a case of Wikipedia:I just don't like it.  --E-960 (talk) 12:20, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Tammbeck, I will report what is happening here, this type of text is fully appropriate for this article this is nothing more than Wikipedia:Status quo stonewalling. --E-960 (talk) 12:28, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: @ You will need to build a consensus to add your content, which is not currently written with a dispassionate, neutral tone.Tammbecktalk 12:33, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

text: There are two problems with this.  First, it makes it appear as if the "intolerance" is real, and not just a feeling of some of the Christians.  Second, it fails to mention that those "interferences with religious liberty" are in fact cases of reducing religious privileges in response to some religious folks misusing them. Trasz (talk) 17:01, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issues facing Christians in the EU  

message: Users Tammbeck and Trasz reverted text related to issues facing Christians, backed up by reliable reference sources, without providing any sort of constructive feedback other then its "NPOV" or "not neutral". Issues facing Christians today in the EU is absolutely appropriate for this article, and removing this text citing some undefined neutrality arguments is nothing more than sanitizing this article, which in fact amounts to a POV push. Pls look through related articles, such as Religion in the United States or Religion in the United Kingdom to see that they contain the same type of statements related to issues or problems facing various religious communities. --E-960 (talk) 12:53, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed your text, simply because what it says is blatantly false.  It would be fine if it said that some christians might _feel_ that reducing some of their privileges, for example no longer turning a blind eye at religiously motivated hate, are an "interference with religious liberty"; instead the text mentioned such interferences as if they were a fact.Trasz (talk) 15:45, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Trasz, "religiously motivated hate"? I don't think that's an objective or neutral statement, more like your personal opinion. You do understand that other Abrahamic faiths hold much of the same doctrines in respect of social constructs. Though, just like with anything there are numerous variations of that (conservative/liberal). But, you only single out Christians as "hateful". --E-960 (talk) 17:50, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Religiously motivated hate is a fact, not a "statement", neutral or not.  And indeed, it's not specific to Christianity, nor does it apply to all Christian denominations; while spewing hate is the modus operandi for e.g. Catholic Church in Poland, there are quite a few Christian denominations that are not evil at all.  I'm "singling Christians out" simply because the article is about Christianity. Trasz (talk) 18:04, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Trasz, I don't think that what you are saying is in any way objective. --E-960 (talk) 10:37, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yet you are unable to point out any particular element that wouldn't be objective.  Trasz (talk) 16:56, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

text: I can't find any equivalent text in eitherReligion in the United States or Religion in the United Kingdom, perhaps you can point to what you are talking about? -----Snowded TALK 04:51, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Snowded, as a quick example, pls see the sub-section on Islam in the Religion in the United States article, the third paragraph there likewise presents a narrative about issues facing the Islamic community. --E-960 (talk) 10:37, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't see any equivalent of your proposed edits here, which are sourced from sites which are highly partisan in nature.  Neither can I see anything on either article about persecution of Christians.  You have to come up with third party sources before you can make any statement.  I also suggest you respond on the ANI thread in such a way as to indicate that you will respect this and stop the personal attacks and edit warring - otherwise you are going to get a lengthy topic ban.  I'll say now (and I am a Catholic with a background in science) that I am concerned about what Midgely calls 'scientism' namely the creation of a new and intolerant religion a la Dawkins et al.  But that is long way from the position you are adopting. -----Snowded TALK 11:12, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  User:Tammbeck and User:Trasz status quo stonewalling 

message: I edited  Life Force out  of the section of which countries "don't  believe in a God, Spirit  or Life  Force" because  Life Force is the energy and the functioning inside living organisms. Sone people  may not believe  in spiritual elements, but this mostly relates to scientific things. 
Atheism is basically  people  who don't  believe  in God, Heaven or Hell or any kind of fantasy or strong supernatural. That's literally it. There's  nothing  else involved.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MountainLaurel88 (talk • contribs) 10:19, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Life Force is nothing to do with religion  

message: Separate atheists to:
* antitheists: people focusing on not recognizing a God: cosmogonic person
* physicalists/metaphysical naturalists/logicalists = metaphysical logicists: people who focus on affirmative absolute rationalism: axiomatic prerequisites for physical foundations (quantum foundations for our local universe), chemical abiogenesis of life, neuroscience, studies on personhood and any possible personhood-yielding computer (human brain, future personhooded computer with all the digital Brodmannian regions and their complicated interactions (not exact biomimicry but data-processing modalities mimicking)
The vast majority of atheists care too little about physicalism/logicalism (typical logicism is mathematics focused; metaphysical logicism = logicalism recognizes the difference between axiomatic proof systems (like mathematics and their hyponymic geometries; infinite axiomatic systems are logically possible = allomathematics = different mathematics/ they don't have to be useful/ some are good for task-specific solutions/ nobody stops you to create infinite axiomatic systems/ the axiomatic system of all axiomatic systems = omniaxiomatics = pantoaxiomatics = [omni]universal axiomatics doesn't exist [not all infinite axiomatic systems are compatible]/ the taboos aren't logically fundamental thus rejecting allomathematics for reasons outside rigorous logic is a hollow biased mistake) versus axiomatic ontological systems (all infinite possible physics and their universe-like substantialities)
The term logicalism is deeper than physicalism because many physicalists aren't clear about their different views inside physicalism or they are easily attacked by antiphysicalists who disparagingly misdefine physicalism.
Logicalism = metaphysical logicism is to logically seek the axiomatic prerequisites for physical foundations (quantum foundations in our local universe), abiogenesis, soulless neuroscience, etc. Logicalism: to accept logic = logical axiomatics and procedures as the self-causal foundations of spatiotemporal coexistence of phenomena within compatible frameworks (different physics aren't compatible in the same universe).
Atheism is a comment. A negation of the ideas of others. All words are useful. But logicalism = physicalism = metaphysical naturalism = exclusive positivism = absolute rationalism are affirmative.
Affirmative philosophy is superior to the mere negotiation of the ideas of others.
Metaphysical worldviews are gradient. Many atheists are mild logicalists or logicalist friendly. But most of them don't practically care about logicalism.
Fragment the hypernym atheists to antitheists and logicalists because it is an important worldview difference (in many cases; it's complicated because metaphysical worldviews are gradient).
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.92.62.203 (talk) 07:26, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Atheism is a hypernym/wide term

message: Data from 2010 is not relevant anymore, it should be replaced with more recent data if available. 2A07:7E81:253D:0:18EA:827F:6BEB:56A6 (talk) 13:31, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated data