Should religion and politics be separate?
+13
Tashski
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD
timeout
bambu
astra
Phil Hornby
astradt1
Shirina
Papaumau
Stox 16
oftenwrong
Penderyn
Ivan
17 posters
Page 1 of 3
Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3 
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Ivan Mon Dec 19, 2011 11:10 am
I see that Cameron is working his way through the ‘Thatcher Handbook On How To Be An Evil Prime Minister’. He’s already read the pages about making anti-immigrant noises before an election, smear all trade unionists, demonise public sector workers and pretend to be standing up for Britain in Europe (in his case, by walking away from discussions having achieved nothing). The next page in the book is about religion.
The old witch played her part by making a speech in a church in which she claimed that “the important thing about the Good Samaritan wasn’t that he was good, it was that he had money”. Now it’s Cameron turn. Religion is a wonderful thing for a politician who dares to use it, since it’s the best form of social control ever invented. It conditions its adherents to be docile and conformist to authority, and to accept as “God’s will” whatever shyte politicians such as Cameron throw at them. For Cameron to claim to be a Christian, when his vile government is pursuing policies which do anything but “love thy neighbour”, is simply gross hypocrisy.
Cameron provoked this reaction from Terry Sanderson, the President of the National Secular Society: “His promotion of faith for other people when his own is so wishy-washy is typical of a politician who thinks religion is a useful means of social control. But you cannot force people to believe what they have reasoned to be untrue. Nor will they be convinced that religion is the only route to morality. The daily headlines from around the world have shown that religion can be a thousand times more destructive than any rioter in Tottenham. The British Social Attitudes Survey published last week showed that 65% of young people in Britain don't have a religion - and they aren't going to be forced to have one. The report ended with a warning to politicians that trying to use religion as a political tool would likely damage them at the ballot box. It seems the Prime Minister is going to learn that lesson the hard way."
Cameron has been promoted way above his abilities because he's rich and because of his royal connections. So it’s only to be expected that his inherent stupidity will surface quite frequently. In this instance, as Richard Dawkins has pointed out: “Cameron has fallen into a trap, as on the one hand he’s saying we’re a Christian country, but on the other he’s saying we’re in a terrible moral state. It seems like a paradox”.
Andrew Copson of the British Humanist Association commented: "As a simple factual statement, what Cameron said is incorrect - only a minority of people in Britain are practising Christians and over half of the population sees itself as non-religious, according to the latest British Social Attitudes survey. All the evidence is that religion makes no difference in terms of a person's social and moral behaviour.” As our new member Hermes remarked on another forum: “If you need a book to tell you right from wrong then you have problems."
The old witch played her part by making a speech in a church in which she claimed that “the important thing about the Good Samaritan wasn’t that he was good, it was that he had money”. Now it’s Cameron turn. Religion is a wonderful thing for a politician who dares to use it, since it’s the best form of social control ever invented. It conditions its adherents to be docile and conformist to authority, and to accept as “God’s will” whatever shyte politicians such as Cameron throw at them. For Cameron to claim to be a Christian, when his vile government is pursuing policies which do anything but “love thy neighbour”, is simply gross hypocrisy.
Cameron provoked this reaction from Terry Sanderson, the President of the National Secular Society: “His promotion of faith for other people when his own is so wishy-washy is typical of a politician who thinks religion is a useful means of social control. But you cannot force people to believe what they have reasoned to be untrue. Nor will they be convinced that religion is the only route to morality. The daily headlines from around the world have shown that religion can be a thousand times more destructive than any rioter in Tottenham. The British Social Attitudes Survey published last week showed that 65% of young people in Britain don't have a religion - and they aren't going to be forced to have one. The report ended with a warning to politicians that trying to use religion as a political tool would likely damage them at the ballot box. It seems the Prime Minister is going to learn that lesson the hard way."
Cameron has been promoted way above his abilities because he's rich and because of his royal connections. So it’s only to be expected that his inherent stupidity will surface quite frequently. In this instance, as Richard Dawkins has pointed out: “Cameron has fallen into a trap, as on the one hand he’s saying we’re a Christian country, but on the other he’s saying we’re in a terrible moral state. It seems like a paradox”.
Andrew Copson of the British Humanist Association commented: "As a simple factual statement, what Cameron said is incorrect - only a minority of people in Britain are practising Christians and over half of the population sees itself as non-religious, according to the latest British Social Attitudes survey. All the evidence is that religion makes no difference in terms of a person's social and moral behaviour.” As our new member Hermes remarked on another forum: “If you need a book to tell you right from wrong then you have problems."
Ivan- Administrator (Correspondence & Recruitment)
- Posts : 7321
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : West Sussex, UK -
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Penderyn Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:31 pm
Note, also, that he is trying to get at Archbishop Williams for being a Christian.
Penderyn- Deactivated
- Posts : 833
Join date : 2011-12-11
Location : Cymru
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by oftenwrong Mon Dec 19, 2011 3:12 pm
How can you fit "Samaritan" into the same sentence as "Tory"?
This government's policies invert the meaning of Luke 11:9
Ask, and it shall be given you....
This government's policies invert the meaning of Luke 11:9
Ask, and it shall be given you....
oftenwrong- Sage
- Posts : 12062
Join date : 2011-10-08
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Stox 16 Wed Dec 28, 2011 3:35 am
oftenwrong wrote:Church of England, Tory Party at Prayer?
yesterday's description. Now it's St. Pauls Cathedral - The City of London at Prayer.
O yes the Tory Party at prayer with and the bankers collecting to money for them
Stox 16- Posts : 1064
Join date : 2011-12-18
Age : 65
Location : Suffolk in the UK
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Stox 16 Wed Dec 28, 2011 3:38 am
Ivan wrote:I see that Cameron is working his way through the ‘Thatcher Handbook On How To Be An Evil Prime Minister’. He’s already read the pages about making anti-immigrant noises before an election, smear all trade unionists, demonise public sector workers and pretend to be standing up for Britain in Europe (in his case, by walking away from discussions having achieved nothing). The next page in the book is about religion.
I love the bit Ivan......Cameron is working his way through the ‘Thatcher Handbook.......I bet the page on economics is very small ha ha ha ha ha
Stox 16- Posts : 1064
Join date : 2011-12-18
Age : 65
Location : Suffolk in the UK
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by oftenwrong Wed Dec 28, 2011 10:19 am
But at the end of Cameron's term of office, will his personal wealth have changed for the better, or for worse?
oftenwrong- Sage
- Posts : 12062
Join date : 2011-10-08
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Penderyn Wed Dec 28, 2011 3:27 pm
oftenwrong wrote:But at the end of Cameron's term of office, will his personal wealth have changed for the better, or for worse?
That isn't a serious question, is it? Obviously he will lose money in the service of his country (if he can remember which it is)!
Penderyn- Deactivated
- Posts : 833
Join date : 2011-12-11
Location : Cymru
Should democracy and religion be separated?
by Papaumau Thu Jan 26, 2012 1:08 pm
When the America constitution was being created it was decided that state and religion should be kept apart.
While I am sure this is maintained in the law-courts in America I do know that many people in the bible-belt still try to use their religion as a way of life. Just like in Iran and other places abroad, I feel that democracy goes out the window when religious law, ( Sharia law enforced by the Mutaween police in Iran ensure that civil law is always superseded by this narrow view of morals and ethics ), is allowed to interfere by influencing and in the main overruling normal and secular life.
In Britain we have no such separation of state and religion and because of this grey area we always see the churches trying their hardest to influence what is done in our parliaments and in our law-courts.
This lack of separation on law and in public life also encourages what is known by some as a kind of religious apartheid where religious schools are not only allowed but are supported by the state.
I am not saying that bigotry is learned in these schools as I do not think it is....BUT...I have always believed that if the state supports faith-schools over standard and even secular education then the seeds are planted very early on in the minds of innocent children that they are different somehow.
What say you ?
Regards.....
Papaumau.
While I am sure this is maintained in the law-courts in America I do know that many people in the bible-belt still try to use their religion as a way of life. Just like in Iran and other places abroad, I feel that democracy goes out the window when religious law, ( Sharia law enforced by the Mutaween police in Iran ensure that civil law is always superseded by this narrow view of morals and ethics ), is allowed to interfere by influencing and in the main overruling normal and secular life.
In Britain we have no such separation of state and religion and because of this grey area we always see the churches trying their hardest to influence what is done in our parliaments and in our law-courts.
This lack of separation on law and in public life also encourages what is known by some as a kind of religious apartheid where religious schools are not only allowed but are supported by the state.
I am not saying that bigotry is learned in these schools as I do not think it is....BUT...I have always believed that if the state supports faith-schools over standard and even secular education then the seeds are planted very early on in the minds of innocent children that they are different somehow.
What say you ?
Regards.....
Papaumau.
Papaumau- Deactivated
- Posts : 219
Join date : 2012-01-24
Location : Scotland
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Ivan Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:30 pm
Hello Papaumau, welcome to 'Cutting Edge', and congratulations on starting a very good discussion topic.
What we’re really talking about is separating education and religion, of which I’m all in favour. How absurd that children in Northern Ireland have had to go to different schools – and sometimes been spat at on the way – because someone has stuck the labels ‘Protestant’ or ‘Catholic’ on them! Are such young children really culpable for the supposed difference between them, namely that some are meant to believe that the wafer in a communion service represents the body of Christ, while others believe it's the real thing?
When Baroness Jenny Tonge was still in the House of Commons, she raised the issue of how Emmanuel College in Gateshead was teaching literal biblical creationism, fairy stories that have no place in a school. So what is taught in Science lessons there, I wonder – the most credible theory (evolution), or is that glossed over so as not to detract from the religious mumbo-jumbo?
Emmanuel College is a city academy which gets 10% of its income from Sir Peter Vardy, a wealthy car salesman with a desire to imprint his personal religious convictions on the young people of Gateshead. The American journalist H.L.Mencken (1880-1956) must have been prophetic when he wrote: “Deep within the heart of every evangelist lies the wreck of a car salesman”.
In modern secular Britain, fewer than 5% of the population attend church regularly. I suspect that most people would agree that education should be entirely about increasing one’s skills and knowledge and overcoming ignorance, not promulgating the prejudices and Bronze Age superstitions of rich individuals or religious groups.
What we’re really talking about is separating education and religion, of which I’m all in favour. How absurd that children in Northern Ireland have had to go to different schools – and sometimes been spat at on the way – because someone has stuck the labels ‘Protestant’ or ‘Catholic’ on them! Are such young children really culpable for the supposed difference between them, namely that some are meant to believe that the wafer in a communion service represents the body of Christ, while others believe it's the real thing?
When Baroness Jenny Tonge was still in the House of Commons, she raised the issue of how Emmanuel College in Gateshead was teaching literal biblical creationism, fairy stories that have no place in a school. So what is taught in Science lessons there, I wonder – the most credible theory (evolution), or is that glossed over so as not to detract from the religious mumbo-jumbo?
Emmanuel College is a city academy which gets 10% of its income from Sir Peter Vardy, a wealthy car salesman with a desire to imprint his personal religious convictions on the young people of Gateshead. The American journalist H.L.Mencken (1880-1956) must have been prophetic when he wrote: “Deep within the heart of every evangelist lies the wreck of a car salesman”.
In modern secular Britain, fewer than 5% of the population attend church regularly. I suspect that most people would agree that education should be entirely about increasing one’s skills and knowledge and overcoming ignorance, not promulgating the prejudices and Bronze Age superstitions of rich individuals or religious groups.
Ivan- Administrator (Correspondence & Recruitment)
- Posts : 7321
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : West Sussex, UK -
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Shirina Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:35 pm
There are a couple of things I don't like about faith-based schools. First, and perhaps foremost, they waste valuable class time with prayer, praise, hymn-singing, and Bible lessons. That's what Sunday school is for. Second, they do try to propagandize the kids. I attended a Christian school for awhile (Protestant) and generally I liked it. That was until we had one of those infamous time-wasters (mentioned above) in the chapel. On this particular day, we were hit hard by one of those pathetic lectures about the "evils" of rock music, complete with demonstrations on backward masking and Satanic imagery on album covers. They even tried to claim that the logo of the local rock radio station (this was in Houston, TX) was actually the face of Alistair Crowley (it looked more like a robot).I have always believed that if the state supports faith-schools over standard and even secular education then the seeds are planted very early on in the minds of innocent children that they are different somehow.
It was just so absurd - especially when the school tried to organize a drive for the students to bring in all of their metal and rock CDs so we could have a little music bonfire. Now, as someone who has studied history - especially WWII - since I was old enough to read* I immediately (and for the first time) linked this kind of behavior with .... you guessed it:
Shirina- Former Administrator
- Posts : 2232
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : Right behind you. Boo!
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by oftenwrong Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:41 pm
"Give me the child, and I will give you the man"
The motto, alleged to be attributed to Francis Xavier, the co-founder of the Jesuit Order. The implication is that the best opportunity to indoctrinate a person in a lifetime of belief and devotion to religious dogma is when they are young.
The motto, alleged to be attributed to Francis Xavier, the co-founder of the Jesuit Order. The implication is that the best opportunity to indoctrinate a person in a lifetime of belief and devotion to religious dogma is when they are young.
oftenwrong- Sage
- Posts : 12062
Join date : 2011-10-08
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Penderyn Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:52 pm
Religion and politics are separate in 'Wales' (Cymru) and Northern Ireland, which have no established churches. The position in Scotland has been explained to me, but I am thick and don't understand. The official position of the C of E has no such effects as fundamentalism in America. While I don't reckon much to established churches, this stuff is essentially displacement behaviour - in my irritating opinion - for those who don't fancy taking on the real bosses.
Penderyn- Deactivated
- Posts : 833
Join date : 2011-12-11
Location : Cymru
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by astradt1 Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:39 pm
How many Church of England schools teach Creationism as scientific fact?
Many of these Gove supported 'Religious' Acadamies are based on US versions of religion...........The one which wanted to open in our town was advised, by the Gove's Department of Indoctranation, to drop any mention of it's intention to teach creationism if it wanted to be approved!!!!!!
My sons went to the local Primary and Junior school which was CofE sponsored.
During the lead up to Christmas each year they also learnt about Diwali, Eid and Hanukkah and all were included in the School Nativity presentation.
I would at least prefer to have our religions involved in politics than the American versions
Many of these Gove supported 'Religious' Acadamies are based on US versions of religion...........The one which wanted to open in our town was advised, by the Gove's Department of Indoctranation, to drop any mention of it's intention to teach creationism if it wanted to be approved!!!!!!
My sons went to the local Primary and Junior school which was CofE sponsored.
During the lead up to Christmas each year they also learnt about Diwali, Eid and Hanukkah and all were included in the School Nativity presentation.
I would at least prefer to have our religions involved in politics than the American versions
Last edited by astradt1 on Fri Jan 27, 2012 7:12 pm; edited 1 time in total
astradt1- Moderator
- Posts : 966
Join date : 2011-10-08
Age : 69
Location : East Midlands
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Papaumau Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:43 pm
Penderyn wrote:Religion and politics are separate in 'Wales' (Cymru) and Northern Ireland, which have no established churches. The position in Scotland has been explained to me, but I am thick and don't understand. The official position of the C of E has no such effects as fundamentalism in America. While I don't reckon much to established churches, this stuff is essentially displacement behaviour - in my irritating opinion - for those who don't fancy taking on the real bosses.
Sorry Penderlyn, but you are wrong that politics and religion and the state are separate in Wales or in any other British country/state. The different religions in all of the British states can and do form up what is known as "faith schools" where any one particular faith can close their schools to anyone but the children from their particular faith. ( Strangely, the protestant sub-division of the Christian faith does not deny any children from other religions faiths access to these more correctly called ecumenical schools ). Now we are seeing single state-sponsored faith schools appearing that are based around Hebrew, and Islamic teachings.
Don't get me wrong here as I firmly believe that any person should be free to follow any religion of their choice, but I do not feel that the state should support this kind of religious apartheid as it tries to teach all our kids the three "R"'s.
As has already been said above, "Schools are designed for the teaching of the educational curriculum and churches and Temples and Synagogues are supposed to handle the teaching of whatever faith they support". To be fair to all children secular education should be available to all. If parents want to teach their children about any individual religion during the normal education day they should build or buy the premises to do it and they should get no financial support from the state.
The closest thing that we have in Britain to an American Constitution is the Magna Carta and that was written by the landlords, the barons and the churches in power at the time. Nothing has changed in Britain since then and although the governments of the past have tried to kid us on that we are totally free to take any particular direction we are in fact not.
Regards.....
Papaumau.
Papaumau- Deactivated
- Posts : 219
Join date : 2012-01-24
Location : Scotland
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Penderyn Fri Jan 27, 2012 6:53 pm
See what Astradt said. Our schools don't push any particular religion, and we are, in fact, probably now the least religious people on earth. Like the Establishment in England, 'religious' schools are an accident of history with no particular agenda and (as long as the madman Gove is not allowed anywhere near them, which he is not) are quite safely under democratic control.
Penderyn- Deactivated
- Posts : 833
Join date : 2011-12-11
Location : Cymru
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by oftenwrong Fri Jan 27, 2012 7:29 pm
Anyone with even a slight interest in buildings knows that there are two main classes of architecture that survive beyond any other types.
Military installations,
and Churches.
(There was a time when the list could have included Pubs.)
Military installations,
and Churches.
(There was a time when the list could have included Pubs.)
oftenwrong- Sage
- Posts : 12062
Join date : 2011-10-08
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Papaumau Sat Jan 28, 2012 11:54 am
Penderyn said:
But I believe that our schools DO push a "particular religion" as we are living in a mainly Christian society and the mass of the churches in Britain are Christian churches who exert great influence over the secular laws of the country.
I do see that governments are also forced by influential minority - if powerful - churches to allow faith schools to continue so that they can then say that they are "fair to all religions", when in fact they are simply allowing this religious apartheid, that I continually harp on about, to continue with state support.
As someone said above...."Give me a child and I will give you back a man", I have always believed that as this speculation is correct it has to be wrong to programme innocent minds into following adult religious habits.
That is why I feel that all state schools should not only be ecumenical, but they should also strive to be totally secular as far as the basic curriculum is concerned so that they can get on with teaching the three "R"s while leaving the last "R" to the churches, temples and synagogues.
Regards....
Papaumau.
"See what Astradt said. Our schools don't push any particular religion, and we are, in fact, probably now the least religious people on earth. Like the Establishment in England, 'religious' schools are an accident of history with no particular agenda and (as long as the madman Gove is not allowed anywhere near them, which he is not) are quite safely under democratic control."
But I believe that our schools DO push a "particular religion" as we are living in a mainly Christian society and the mass of the churches in Britain are Christian churches who exert great influence over the secular laws of the country.
I do see that governments are also forced by influential minority - if powerful - churches to allow faith schools to continue so that they can then say that they are "fair to all religions", when in fact they are simply allowing this religious apartheid, that I continually harp on about, to continue with state support.
As someone said above...."Give me a child and I will give you back a man", I have always believed that as this speculation is correct it has to be wrong to programme innocent minds into following adult religious habits.
That is why I feel that all state schools should not only be ecumenical, but they should also strive to be totally secular as far as the basic curriculum is concerned so that they can get on with teaching the three "R"s while leaving the last "R" to the churches, temples and synagogues.
Regards....
Papaumau.
Papaumau- Deactivated
- Posts : 219
Join date : 2012-01-24
Location : Scotland
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Penderyn Sat Jan 28, 2012 1:16 pm
This is the usual displacement behaviour to avoid fighting real power. I have not come across the behaviour you attack anywhere but in a few Roman Catholic schools even in England, and I was talking about our country. When you know the people on the governors, these American-type fantasies are just laughable, like voting tory or something.
Penderyn- Deactivated
- Posts : 833
Join date : 2011-12-11
Location : Cymru
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Papaumau Sun Jan 29, 2012 12:19 pm
I certainly get your point Penderyn, as if pressurised many of the single-faith schools supported by the British state WOULD accept a child from another faith. This, in fact, just does not happen as people who want to send their children to their school of choice will not be likely to send, for instance, a Christian or a Jewish child to, for example, an Islamic faith school, and any combination of such schools thereafter. This means that it is only children from each home that is based around a single-faith that go to single-faith schools.
It IS the case that all single-faith schools in Britain want to seriously discourage any parent from sending any child that is not of their religion to their religious school. This is what I mean when I use the awful term "religious apartheid", as because all children are born innocent and with a secular and open mind every one of these children have to be "brought up in the faith" of their adult relatives. They have no choice as to what religion they might follow as they are indoctrinated by their parents and their priests to think within the rules and teachings of the existing religion at their homes and in their particular churches.
I am slightly different, ( and what happened to me COULD happen to other children if their minds were to be strong enough ). I mean by that, that after I grew up in Northern Ireland with my loving but bigoted Protestant Christian grandparents, I found myself being indoctrinated in exactly the way I have highlighted above and as I was luckily taken back by my mother, to Scotland, just as I turned nine years old, I was not yet fully programmed into that sometimes vile version of the Christian faith of my grandparents.
I managed to shape my own path through life from that point and I slowly came to believe that all organised religions are a crock and are based on myths and fairy-tales and firstly I became agnostic, which with careful study and the balancing of all the ins and outs of the faiths presented to me, I eventually embraced humanism and atheism. At that point a huge weight was lifted from my shoulders and I found that I was at last totally FREE from such indoctrination !
Sorry for going on a bit folks, but this part of my life and makeup are very important to me.
Regards.....
Papaumau.
It IS the case that all single-faith schools in Britain want to seriously discourage any parent from sending any child that is not of their religion to their religious school. This is what I mean when I use the awful term "religious apartheid", as because all children are born innocent and with a secular and open mind every one of these children have to be "brought up in the faith" of their adult relatives. They have no choice as to what religion they might follow as they are indoctrinated by their parents and their priests to think within the rules and teachings of the existing religion at their homes and in their particular churches.
I am slightly different, ( and what happened to me COULD happen to other children if their minds were to be strong enough ). I mean by that, that after I grew up in Northern Ireland with my loving but bigoted Protestant Christian grandparents, I found myself being indoctrinated in exactly the way I have highlighted above and as I was luckily taken back by my mother, to Scotland, just as I turned nine years old, I was not yet fully programmed into that sometimes vile version of the Christian faith of my grandparents.
I managed to shape my own path through life from that point and I slowly came to believe that all organised religions are a crock and are based on myths and fairy-tales and firstly I became agnostic, which with careful study and the balancing of all the ins and outs of the faiths presented to me, I eventually embraced humanism and atheism. At that point a huge weight was lifted from my shoulders and I found that I was at last totally FREE from such indoctrination !
Sorry for going on a bit folks, but this part of my life and makeup are very important to me.
Regards.....
Papaumau.
Papaumau- Deactivated
- Posts : 219
Join date : 2012-01-24
Location : Scotland
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Ivan Sun Jan 29, 2012 3:09 pm
The Tories certainly think that the Church of England - just like the BBC - should be its mouthpiece. Cameron expects bishops to shut up unless they're supporting his rancid government, so when they opposed the £26k benefits cap they were attacked.
This is an extract from an article which Victoria Coren has written on this subject:-
"The New Testament, if read as an economic tract, is innately rather socialist. It's all sharey-sharey. Jesus wanted everyone to get a bit of bread and fish. He was all about the divvying up and the helping one's neighbour. So, if Christianity is going to make itself heard on tax-and-spend policies, it has got to lean towards spreading the spoils around.
There's not much the bishops can do about that. Their hands are tied. The gospels say what they say. If their lordships wanted to support the idea that handing out bread and fish is bad for people because it demotivates them from doing their own baking and fishing, they'd really have to leave the pulpit and get a job on a tabloid.
And while the Stephen Hesters of this world, already paid 1.2 million loaves a year of arguably public bread, are being given fish factories as bonuses, the church can hardly join in with a move to reduce herring portions for the hungry. It would look ridiculous. Similarly, last year, when the Archbishop of Canterbury warned that benefit cuts might hurt the truly weak, people raged at him for being 'political' when he was just being Christian."
For the full article and reader comments:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jan/29/victoria-coren-church-force-good?INTCMP=SRCH
This is an extract from an article which Victoria Coren has written on this subject:-
"The New Testament, if read as an economic tract, is innately rather socialist. It's all sharey-sharey. Jesus wanted everyone to get a bit of bread and fish. He was all about the divvying up and the helping one's neighbour. So, if Christianity is going to make itself heard on tax-and-spend policies, it has got to lean towards spreading the spoils around.
There's not much the bishops can do about that. Their hands are tied. The gospels say what they say. If their lordships wanted to support the idea that handing out bread and fish is bad for people because it demotivates them from doing their own baking and fishing, they'd really have to leave the pulpit and get a job on a tabloid.
And while the Stephen Hesters of this world, already paid 1.2 million loaves a year of arguably public bread, are being given fish factories as bonuses, the church can hardly join in with a move to reduce herring portions for the hungry. It would look ridiculous. Similarly, last year, when the Archbishop of Canterbury warned that benefit cuts might hurt the truly weak, people raged at him for being 'political' when he was just being Christian."
For the full article and reader comments:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jan/29/victoria-coren-church-force-good?INTCMP=SRCH
Ivan- Administrator (Correspondence & Recruitment)
- Posts : 7321
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : West Sussex, UK -
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by oftenwrong Sun Jan 29, 2012 4:31 pm
What's might help to shift Opinion is, in between The Olympics and the Silver Jubilee, a SECOND COMING.
oftenwrong- Sage
- Posts : 12062
Join date : 2011-10-08
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Phil Hornby Sun Jan 29, 2012 5:16 pm
We 'men of the cloth' are quite clear that it is our bounden duty to speak up for the Tory Party and its typically caring policies at all times.
That may account for why I have been summoned before the Bishop tomorrow at 9am sharp.... :affraid:
That may account for why I have been summoned before the Bishop tomorrow at 9am sharp.... :affraid:
Phil Hornby- Blogger
- Posts : 4002
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : Drifting on Easy Street
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by oftenwrong Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:43 am
Not for watering the communion wine again, is it?
oftenwrong- Sage
- Posts : 12062
Join date : 2011-10-08
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Penderyn Mon Jan 30, 2012 1:54 pm
I'd say the Bishops were probably the most progressive members of the House of Lords - for what that is worth!
Penderyn- Deactivated
- Posts : 833
Join date : 2011-12-11
Location : Cymru
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Penderyn Mon Jan 30, 2012 2:01 pm
The main problem is that certain schools are perceived as better than others. At a college I worked in once, back in the dreadful eighties, there were so many applications they were down to deciding on a basic short-list for jobs by whether the stamp was straight on the envelope, because the numbers took too long to handle properly. Given the concept of 'faith' I suppose some possible connection with it is as good a marker as any. The other way around wouldn't make much sense. Get rid of 'em as soon as you can, but there'll be a fair few problems about compensation for buildings and such.
Penderyn- Deactivated
- Posts : 833
Join date : 2011-12-11
Location : Cymru
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Papaumau Mon Jan 30, 2012 2:49 pm
That observation Penderyn, while I am sure it is correct, mostly applies to schools that have a good reputation for their academic results. In that case I would expect every caring parent to do the same - if they could afford to, of course - as this promises that the child will have the best final outcome as far as the three Rs are concerned.
What I am really talking about here is that fourth "R" of religion as I feel that serious subjects like that should never be presented to the open psyche of a child until they are able to make their own mind up about which faith to follow, if any.
Another of the promises that faith schools make to the parents of potentially new pupils is the accepted norm that religion teaches morals and ethics better than it is done in either ecumenical or even secular schools. ( Actually there are no such thing as "secular" schools in Britain that I know of as they all have some form of religious - usually Protestant Christian - attachments to their form of education, even if this is only restricted to a prayer at assembly ).
That aside I do not believe that the teaching of morals or ethics should be held in the preserve of the religious schools as all decent humans know what right and wrong is very early on and they do not need it pushed down their throats by the theists out there, especially not when their minds are still being formed, as with children.
Regards....
Papaumau.
What I am really talking about here is that fourth "R" of religion as I feel that serious subjects like that should never be presented to the open psyche of a child until they are able to make their own mind up about which faith to follow, if any.
Another of the promises that faith schools make to the parents of potentially new pupils is the accepted norm that religion teaches morals and ethics better than it is done in either ecumenical or even secular schools. ( Actually there are no such thing as "secular" schools in Britain that I know of as they all have some form of religious - usually Protestant Christian - attachments to their form of education, even if this is only restricted to a prayer at assembly ).
That aside I do not believe that the teaching of morals or ethics should be held in the preserve of the religious schools as all decent humans know what right and wrong is very early on and they do not need it pushed down their throats by the theists out there, especially not when their minds are still being formed, as with children.
Regards....
Papaumau.
Papaumau- Deactivated
- Posts : 219
Join date : 2012-01-24
Location : Scotland
Prayers before council meetings prove unlawful !
by Papaumau Sun Feb 12, 2012 12:23 pm
( Thanks to Witchfinder )
In an update to this thread I feel it is interesting to note that this subject has been brought up in local government as well as being attached to national government and state-sponsored education.
Read about this unfolding row HERE. and then come back and tell us what you think.
Regards....
Papaumau.
Papaumau- Deactivated
- Posts : 219
Join date : 2012-01-24
Location : Scotland
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by oftenwrong Sun Feb 12, 2012 1:16 pm
One thread per topic is often a manageable policy.
oftenwrong- Sage
- Posts : 12062
Join date : 2011-10-08
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Papaumau Sun Feb 12, 2012 1:32 pm
Yes, "Oftenwrong", you could be right about that one at least, but in my wide knowledge of forums and how they work I find that often points from different threads can stray over to each-other regularly. While this does happen I have to admit that staying "on-topic" and keeping the topic to one thread is usually the best way to go.
The question I now have to ask myself is: If this response to your last post is "off-topic" we too are both breaking the rules held within the Netiquette principles.
Regards.....
Papaumau.
Papaumau- Deactivated
- Posts : 219
Join date : 2012-01-24
Location : Scotland
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by oftenwrong Sun Feb 12, 2012 1:36 pm
Over time, all threads become the same thread, as adherents to a point of view spread that view ever more widely. It's the human condition.
oftenwrong- Sage
- Posts : 12062
Join date : 2011-10-08
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Ivan Mon Feb 27, 2012 10:56 pm
LOL, not if I can help it! :affraid:Over time, all threads become the same thread
Recent comments by Rick Santorum have brought renewed attention to the role of religion in politics:-
http://www.people-press.org/2012/02/27/public-views-of-the-divide-between-religion-and-politics/?src=prc-twitter
http://paper.li/f-1297113226
(Interesting article near the bottom of this news letter!!)
Ivan- Administrator (Correspondence & Recruitment)
- Posts : 7321
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : West Sussex, UK -
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Ivan Tue Feb 28, 2012 5:07 pm
How would the Church of England deal with "The cat sat on the mat" if it appeared in the Bible?
The Liberal theologians would point out that such a passage did not, of course, mean that the cat literally sat on the mat. Also, "cat" and "mat" had different meanings in those days from today, and anyway, the text should be interpreted according to the customs and practices of the period.
This would lead to an immediate backlash from the Evangelicals. They would make it an essential condition of faith that a real, physical, living cat, being a domestic pet of the felix domesticus species, and having a tail, did physically place its whole body on a floor covering, designed for that purpose, and which is "on the floor, but not of the floor". The expression "on the floor, but not of the floor" would be explained in a leaflet.
Meanwhile, the Catholics would have developed the Feast of the Sedentation of the Blessed Cat. This would teach that the cat was white and majestically reclined on a mat of gold thread before its assumption to the Great Cat Basket of Heaven. This is commemorated by the singing of the Magnificent Cat, lighting three candles, and ringing the bell five times.
This would cause a schism with the Orthodox Churches which believe that the tradition requires Holy Cats Day (as it is colloquially known) to be marked by the lighting of six candles and ringing the bell four times. This would partly be resolved by the Cuckoo Land Declaration recognizing the validity of each.
Eventually, the Anglican House of Bishops would issue a statement on the Doctrine of Feline Sedentation. It would explain that, traditionally, the text describes a domestic feline quadruped superjacent to an unattached covering of a fundamental surface. For determining the salvific and eschatological significations, they follow the heuristic analytical principles adopted in dealing with the Canine Fenestrations Question ("How much is that doggie in the window?") and the Affirmative Musaceous Paradox ("Yes, we have no bananas") and so on for another 210 pages.
The General Synod of the Church of England would then commend this report, without officially endorsing it, as helpful resource material for clergy as they explain to the good Christians in the pew the difficult doctrine of the cat sitting on the mat.
The Liberal theologians would point out that such a passage did not, of course, mean that the cat literally sat on the mat. Also, "cat" and "mat" had different meanings in those days from today, and anyway, the text should be interpreted according to the customs and practices of the period.
This would lead to an immediate backlash from the Evangelicals. They would make it an essential condition of faith that a real, physical, living cat, being a domestic pet of the felix domesticus species, and having a tail, did physically place its whole body on a floor covering, designed for that purpose, and which is "on the floor, but not of the floor". The expression "on the floor, but not of the floor" would be explained in a leaflet.
Meanwhile, the Catholics would have developed the Feast of the Sedentation of the Blessed Cat. This would teach that the cat was white and majestically reclined on a mat of gold thread before its assumption to the Great Cat Basket of Heaven. This is commemorated by the singing of the Magnificent Cat, lighting three candles, and ringing the bell five times.
This would cause a schism with the Orthodox Churches which believe that the tradition requires Holy Cats Day (as it is colloquially known) to be marked by the lighting of six candles and ringing the bell four times. This would partly be resolved by the Cuckoo Land Declaration recognizing the validity of each.
Eventually, the Anglican House of Bishops would issue a statement on the Doctrine of Feline Sedentation. It would explain that, traditionally, the text describes a domestic feline quadruped superjacent to an unattached covering of a fundamental surface. For determining the salvific and eschatological significations, they follow the heuristic analytical principles adopted in dealing with the Canine Fenestrations Question ("How much is that doggie in the window?") and the Affirmative Musaceous Paradox ("Yes, we have no bananas") and so on for another 210 pages.
The General Synod of the Church of England would then commend this report, without officially endorsing it, as helpful resource material for clergy as they explain to the good Christians in the pew the difficult doctrine of the cat sitting on the mat.
Ivan- Administrator (Correspondence & Recruitment)
- Posts : 7321
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : West Sussex, UK -
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by oftenwrong Tue Feb 28, 2012 5:11 pm
And another theory bites the dust!
Religious leaders have always taken a keen interest in Politics. Popes in the Middle Ages were nothing if not Politicians.
Research the Medici for more examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medici
Religious leaders have always taken a keen interest in Politics. Popes in the Middle Ages were nothing if not Politicians.
Research the Medici for more examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medici
oftenwrong- Sage
- Posts : 12062
Join date : 2011-10-08
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by oftenwrong Tue Feb 28, 2012 8:15 pm
The Religion of the Masses is now SCEPTICISM.
oftenwrong- Sage
- Posts : 12062
Join date : 2011-10-08
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by astra Tue Feb 28, 2012 10:29 pm
The General Synod of the Church of England would then commend this report,
And the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland would have another "Schysim"
astra- Deceased
- Posts : 1864
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : North East England.
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by bambu Wed Mar 28, 2012 10:05 am
astradt1 wrote:In seven days time we will be remembering those who gave their lives for freedom in Two World Wars and countless other conflicts........
Included in that freedom is the right to protest.....and Now we have a Church which is saying, 'That's it you have protested long enough it's time for you to stop'.
This is the same church which will be holding services of Rememberance to those who gave their lives...
I only wish that those who want to Remember would do so outside and refuse to enter the churches........
Pity the Church doesn't have its own army to protect Remembrance Day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1pNFietOAQ
bambu- Posts : 129
Join date : 2012-03-26
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by oftenwrong Wed Mar 28, 2012 12:29 pm
What's the Sally Ann's part in all this?
oftenwrong- Sage
- Posts : 12062
Join date : 2011-10-08
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by timeout Mon Oct 14, 2013 12:03 pm
i think that in public life image is one of the top priorities. the image that a person presents to the public (voters) and to peers and superiors (support) will determine their career path and a big part of public image is being of good standing within a community and to be judged to have good moral values. unfortunately both the' good standing' and 'moral values' are associated with religion and looking at public figures we see an overwhelming number of them either are religious or profess to being religious. not only that but we know religious groups can wield a lot of power through their voting rights not only to support those looking for public positions but also affecting their policies once in office.Papaumau wrote:When the America constitution was being created it was decided that state and religion should be kept apart.
While I am sure this is maintained in the law-courts in America I do know that many people in the bible-belt still try to use their religion as a way of life. Just like in Iran and other places abroad, I feel that democracy goes out the window when religious law, ( Sharia law enforced by the Mutaween police in Iran ensure that civil law is always superseded by this narrow view of morals and ethics ), is allowed to interfere by influencing and in the main overruling normal and secular life.
In Britain we have no such separation of state and religion and because of this grey area we always see the churches trying their hardest to influence what is done in our parliaments and in our law-courts.
This lack of separation on law and in public life also encourages what is known by some as a kind of religious apartheid where religious schools are not only allowed but are supported by the state.
I am not saying that bigotry is learned in these schools as I do not think it is....BUT...I have always believed that if the state supports faith-schools over standard and even secular education then the seeds are planted very early on in the minds of innocent children that they are different somehow.
What say you ?
Regards.....
Papaumau.
you might argue that the constitution separated religion from state but when those in power overwhelmingly profess religious belief and religious voters cast their votes on religious grounds it's difficult to see the separation as being much more than the paper it's written on! the same true for the UK only we still have a monarch as head of the Church of England and bishops in the house of lords!
it is the way of religion to try and control the state. those professing to speak on behalf of god (whichever god) will always try to have the power to control the state. who is greater the king on his throne or god on his? religious bodies want the king subject to god and as god's representatives on earth subject to them by default. all the way back through history we see the uneasy alliance between monarchy and religion as each strives for control.
timeout- Posts : 43
Join date : 2013-10-12
Location : london
Re: Should religion and politics be separate?
by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Oct 22, 2013 7:00 pm
oftenwrong wrote:But at the end of Cameron's term of office, will his personal wealth have changed for the better, or for worse?
You're not suggesting his role as PM is a unique term in this office, because he altruistically intends to lighten his own purse in favour of the plebs, are you?
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD- Posts : 3167
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales
Should religion and politics be separate?
by Tashski Mon Nov 18, 2013 12:58 am
I had an interesting discussion with my dad the other day about food banks and the amount of very poor/homeless people in Britain. He commented that you don't often see or hear of religious organisations getting involved in helping people in the news instead you hear more about how the churches (all denominations) are chipping in about how issues such as gay marriage are eroding the fabric of our society.
I would say I'm inclined to agree with him. I feel the Salvation Army do a lot of good with the homeless but their stance on homosexuality and publising that stance in the way that they do when they run youth groups is wrong. However, as an atheist and a lesbian perhaps I'm biased.
I'm curious what other people think about this?
I would say I'm inclined to agree with him. I feel the Salvation Army do a lot of good with the homeless but their stance on homosexuality and publising that stance in the way that they do when they run youth groups is wrong. However, as an atheist and a lesbian perhaps I'm biased.
I'm curious what other people think about this?
Tashski- Posts : 13
Join date : 2013-08-27
Age : 36
Location : Cornwall -
Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Similar topics» The politics of envy and its causes
» Is Theresa May the new Machiavelli?
» Child support as USA politics
» What now for Labour? (Part 2)
» Growing a new politics from the personal
» Is Theresa May the new Machiavelli?
» Child support as USA politics
» What now for Labour? (Part 2)
» Growing a new politics from the personal
Page 1 of 3
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum