LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksFor what it's worth, the chart represents the US specifically.
In the UK, non-religious is a much larger proportion of the population.
For what it's worth, the chart represents the US specifically.
In the UK, non-religious is a much larger proportion of the population.
To those who feel religion is being pushed down their throats - do you feel that this is actually being done or is it just the potential that it could be done that bothers you, or both, or neither?
If it is actually being done, in what ways do you feel this is being done?
No trees were harmed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were displaced and terribly inconvenienced.
See page 1, post 1. This entire thread is about the religious whining because the courts ruled that prayer can't be officially mandated council business.Originally Posted by Galant
That pretty much is you pushing your beliefs and ideals onto other people. You would like to take the religious and stop them from being religious?
Throughout most of your posts I feel like you have been pushing your ideas on readers and unnecassarily ridiculing the beliefs of others by using terms like "sky fairy worship" which even I find offensive whilst not being particularly religious. I have been on the recieving end of religion being pushed upon me; having a lot of family as Jehovah's Witnesses.
I can understand that you would like to stop religion being a pivotal factor when important decisions are made, and stopping people from pushing their views on other people in general. However, I see no reason for people to have their beliefs stripped from them and then forced to think in one direction.
I don't see that as pushing religion down anyone's throats.
I see that as people feeling they are having a personal right or freedom being taken away. They aren't asking for a law to make everyone pray. They aren't asking for a law that everyone be a Christian. They are asking for the freedom to be able to pray as Christians in whatever office they find themselves. That's not forcing their views on anyone. I'm not saying laws don't need to be changed or redefined. This country has for many years been declared as Christian. I for one don't believe a 'country' can be Christian. 'Countries' can't belong to any faith, it's a matter for individual people. However, since this country has been traditionally Christian, though not an expert on law, I can imagine that there are laws in place which do enforce Christianity. I don't mind this country saying it wont enforce Christianity. If the law needs to be changed to say that council meetings no longer have to have prayer before they start, then good and fine. However, if the government then says whilst you do not have to pray before a meeting, neither can you pray before a meeting, then that's crossing a line. We are supposed to have freedom in religion. We elect people to office, not machines. People are who they are and take on the fights they take on and create what they create because of who they are and the beliefs they hold. A nurse might become a nurse because she believes her faith teaches compassion and care, and so then it would be unfair and counterproductive to ask that nurse to throw away or not practise her faith when she is acting officially. For her, her nursing is part of living out her faith. To quit her faith would be to quit nursing. So too it is possible that people become lawyers because they believe the ideals of justice are taught by their faith and other people might become councilors because they believe they can have a genuinely positive impact upon society. I would imagine that desire has a good chance of being the number one reason people would say they enter local politics. Official government, on paper and in principle should stay neutral on religion, however, society is not neutral and people are not neutral. Where do all our ideas come from? From many places. Should the government promote atheism? No. No more than it should promote a religion. Does that mean, therefore, that an atheist councilor who is motivated by ideals arising out of his atheism should stop pursuing those ideals? Rather than worry about where ideals and ideas come from, I believe the ideas and ideals should be weighed on their own merit. Theists might dislike atheism but that does not mean they should dismiss ideas coming from atheists purely for that fact. Rather, they should look at the idea, which comes from a human being, and consider it upon its own merits. So too, I would argue, an atheist, though he might dislike and not understand religious belief, should not dismiss ideas arising out of religious belief solely because of the fact. Rather he should consider the idea upon its own merits because it comes from a human being. Human beings create society.
Now, as to the notion of praying, audibly, or having time set aside for silent prayer, if the laws doesn't demand everyone to pray, then I don't see it as the forcing of religion down anyone's throats. So what is the problem with it? Financial? Tax payer money being wasted on prayer? What is an atheist councilor spends time considering his official positions and plans in the light of atheist ideology? Should that be stopped too? I have tried to show that our motives and ideas and actions come from a variety of sources, religion being one, and that the ideas that humans produce should be weighed on their own merits. So too then what if the practises of men to produce their ideas and plans be weighed on their own merits? We do not need to consider prayer as only having value if understood as communication with God. For the atheist, if prayer helps a theist think, if it's a part of his routine and helps him produce results, just as many individuals have habits and practises to help them focus, can it not be seen in this light? Why do we have to ban it and why should an atheist be threatened by it?
That is why I asked the question.
No trees were harmed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were displaced and terribly inconvenienced.
You have me there. Your demands that people shouldn't be practising their faith (regardless of what that might be) have clearly been misinterpreted by myself.
Yep, so it's ok to celebrate one deity but not another? Sounds dangerously like intolerance to me.
Yep, and you all sing "we wish you a merry midwinter feasting festival", right? Even Dawkins has no problem celebrating Christmas (check out the Infinite Monkey Cage from last Christmas).
Failed on the first hurdle, I'm afraid. Despite a catholic upbringing (by which I mean I went to a Catholic primary school. And despite your suggestion earlier in the thread neither I nor any of my schoolmates were abused to the best of my knowledge) I don't consider myself a Catholic. I don't even consider myself Christian, or even a theist.
Seems fair, I personally don't see the need for faith or free schools.
Again, seems fair. Where we differ is that I have no problem with people doing it in their own time, where you seem to think that they shouldn't be doing it at all.
Not sure what this is about, but I'm guessing that it relates to the provision of chaplains in hospital rather than a dig at the lack of beds in the NHS. So long as some space is provided for prayer or contemplative thought I have no issue with this either.
You mean by paying a minister a bung? I see the Lords as being largely irrelevant in politics.
Good luck with it. Which party will you be standing for?I intend to get my demands via the democratic process.
I think RE has a lot of value in the NC, but I don't believe it has ever fit under "science". Certainly when I was at school I was taught biology, chemistry and physics in science. Things may have changed since then, but as I have no kids it would seem odd for me to hang around schools. I'm sure you'll shoot me down regards this, but I firmly believe that RE (so long as taught well) helps teach a greater understanding of the world's cultures both past and present. It doesn't have to be indoctrinating.The science curriculum should teach science, not religious controversy or pseudo science.
And while we are at it how about we drop RE from the national curriculum and replace it with PE (I'm negotiable on this one but I do think PE should be on there).
And PE isn't on the NC any longer? Crikey, no wonder the kids today are so fat.
*I'm not!
I'm sure you don't. But theocracy doesn't have to be overt blasphemer burning to be theocracy. Using official government business and time to propagate your religion is still ramming it down people's throats, at the very least for the Councillors who attend meetings. Tax payers money is not for worship, that's what private time and life is for.
Please define 'ramming it down people's throats'.
No trees were harmed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were displaced and terribly inconvenienced.
Who says that Christians are in a majority? They be , but that is not an inference you can take from the pie chart. What was the sample size, were the participants randomized?
As I say, the graph says nothing without supporting information, other than a ploy to fool those that can't read behind the image.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute
How about having it as part of the official process during a governmental procedure?
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
Sourcing the data is hard, the humanist society for instance suggest quite elegantly that its an overestimation in the UK
http://www.humanism.org.uk/campaigns/census-2011
However, I think you'd have to slice the data in an 'edge case manner', for want of a phrase, to find that in the UK or the US Christianity is not the vast majority.
There is always a case of citation needed with graphs, but this one is missing all percentages and I think is ment to be more indicative of an accepted trend.
If we want to try and look at the real distrabution we could be here a long time, however I think its fair to say that few doubt its a majority group in the UK and the US?
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
How utterly disingenuous of you.
"You can't be a part of council meetings unless you pray to Jesus" doesn't strike you as "pushing religion down anyone's throats"?
Would you be just as happy if it were mandatory Muslim prayer, where all the Christians in the room had to sing Mohammed's praises, before being permitted to do any council business?
Did you and The Animus actually read my post from which you are quoting? I wasn't arguing that forcing people to pray isn't forcing religion. Obviously it is. I was arguing that council members praying together when it wasn't required isn't ramming religion down anyone's throat.
Please read what I write before quoting me. If you don't want to read my posts, then don't quote me.
No trees were harmed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were displaced and terribly inconvenienced.
But that's the point! Christian prayer was mandatory for councillors, an atheist objected, and the Christian establishment shat their collective pants about the clear attack on their freedom at being banned from forcing everyone to make prayers unto Jesus.
The council rejected the notion of making the prayer optional. That's why it got to court!
You can't be serious. Christianity has around 2.2 billion followers globally, most of those are centred in the west.
I am serious in that the pie chat posted does not nmean anything. As TeePee now says, it is supposed to be representative of the US.
And there 'might' be 2.2 billion - Christians in the West, but again that is a meaningless statistic if it is being used in comparison with other religions, or those with no religion, where no figures are quoted.
Neither is there any evidence in the image as shown to demonstrate that the pie slices are in direct proportion to the percentage figures.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
