Is Britain a Christian country?

In this country this day and age being commited to any belief be it religious or ideological is not popular or easy it isn't just religion.

[Qtx]

Originally Posted by Paul M

Im still looking for my local Jedi temple ........

So are the other 400k UK registered Jedi's!

Originally Posted by Paul M

Im still looking for my local Jedi temple ........

Build it, and they will come.....

[Ignitionnet]

Think Ms Widdecombe has been debating with Dawkins and Hitchens too much. Most have moved on from those guys to a more confident secularism where the only real objections are where the religious seek special privileges or rail against accepted and proven fact as it contradicts their beliefs. Absolutely there were times when atheism was equated with being more aggressive but, you know, you get more comfortable with it as you become less of a minority if not an outright majority.

Still, her right to give her opinion. I consider it nonsense and think it echoes the 'persecution' vibe. Those used to privilege nearly always plead persecution when they perceive themselves as losing those privileges, even if they aren't actually losing them.

EDIT: That said she mentions 'quite militant secularism'. Not sure about 'militant' but largely guilty as charged - religion IMHO has absolutely no place in government any more than any other assertion of privilege due to social, economic or any other factors do. So I agree with that part and gladly admit to being a part of it. If she can't separate secularism and atheism, and it should be noted there are plenty of religious people who are enthusiastically secularist, that's her issue. The state either favouring or discriminating against people due to race, sexuality, or many other things is unacceptable, it should be exactly the same with regards to religion, hence a secular state is the best solution for all, besides those the current arrangements favour.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Think Ms Widdecombe has been debating with Dawkins and Hitchens too much. Most have moved on from those guys to a more confident secularism where the only real objections are where the religious seek special privileges or rail against accepted and proven fact as it contradicts their beliefs. Absolutely there were times when atheism was equated with being more aggressive but, you know, you get more comfortable with it as you become less of a minority if not an outright majority.

Still, her right to give her opinion. I consider it nonsense and think it echoes the 'persecution' vibe. Those used to privilege nearly always plead persecution when they perceive themselves as losing those privileges, even if they aren't actually losing them.

EDIT: That said she mentions 'quite militant secularism'. Not sure about 'militant' but largely guilty as charged - religion IMHO has absolutely no place in government any more than any other assertion of privilege due to social, economic or any other factors do. So I agree with that part and gladly admit to being a part of it. If she can't separate secularism and atheism, and it should be noted there are plenty of religious people who are enthusiastically secularist, that's her issue. The state either favouring or discriminating against people due to race, sexuality, or many other things is unacceptable, it should be exactly the same with regards to religion, hence a secular state is the best solution for all, besides those the current arrangements favour.

QFT....

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Paul M

Im still looking for my local Jedi temple ........

the temple is within you -move along now these aren't the droids your looking for

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

hence a secular state is the best solution for all,

Don't you mean "the best solution for those who prefer secularism"?

[Qtx]

Originally Posted by Russ

Don't you mean "the best solution for those who prefer secularism"?

No, he means it's the best solution for all, that's why he said it. I agree with him.

---------- Post added at 17:02 ---------- Previous post was at 17:00 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

Build it, and they will come.....

Some nice tax benefits from registering a charity/religion....probably why there is 180k registered charities in the UK and that doesn't count the many thousands that don't have to register for being under the 5k a year income threshold.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Qtx

No, he means it's the best solution for all, that's why he said it. I agree with him.

So the option that heavily favours one side is best for everyone?

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Russ

Don't you mean "the best solution for those who prefer secularism"?

To be fair to me I did qualify it:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

The state either favouring or discriminating against people due to race, sexuality, or many other things is unacceptable, it should be exactly the same with regards to religion, hence a secular state is the best solution for all, besides those the current arrangements favour.

Equality in the eyes of the state is obviously the best solution for all bar those who benefit directly or indirectly from inequality.

---------- Post added at 17:18 ---------- Previous post was at 17:17 ----------

Originally Posted by Russ

So the option that heavily favours one side is best for everyone?

Okay bit confused. How does separating church and state favour anyone, let alone favour them heavily?

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

To be fair to me I did qualify it:



Equality in the eyes of the state is obviously the best solution for all bar those who benefit directly or indirectly from inequality.

If I'm understanding this correctly, would you be in favour of the UK remaining as 'Christian' as it is as long those who do not go along with its teachings aren't discriminated on the grounds of gender, sexuality etc?

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Okay bit confused. How does separating church and state favour anyone, let alone favour them heavily?

Do you not agree it would favour New Atheists, anti-religionists etc?

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Russ

If I'm understanding this correctly, would you be in favour of the UK remaining as 'Christian' as it is as long those who do not go along with its teachings aren't discriminated on the grounds of gender, sexuality etc?

Do you not agree it would favour New Atheists, anti-religionists etc?

I would like to see disestablishment.

May I ask you a question in return to frame yours - do you not agree that laws requiring equal treatment by employers, disabled access requirements, etc favour the disabled?

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

I would like to see disestablishment.

OK but is that a yes or a no?

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

May I ask you a question in return to frame yours - do you not agree that laws requiring equal treatment by employers, disabled access requirements, etc favour the disabled?

Given how far-ranging that can be it's difficult to give a firm answer, it would depend on the situation.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Russ

OK but is that a yes or a no?

Given how far-ranging that can be it's difficult to give a firm answer, it would depend on the situation.

I want formal disestablishment of the church and the state. That we'll remain culturally Christian for the foreseeable is inevitable.

I was pretty specific in mentioning equal treatment, not preferential.

No, I don't regard a secular state per se as favouring anyone. If a state were to actively favour those without religion it would not just be secular but discriminatory. I'm every bit as opposed to that as I am establishment. Neither has a place within government.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

I want formal disestablishment of the church and the state. That we'll remain culturally Christian for the foreseeable is inevitable.

I was pretty specific in mentioning equal treatment, not preferential.

No, I don't regard a secular state per se as favouring anyone. If a state were to actively favour those without religion it would not just be secular but discriminatory. I'm every bit as opposed to that as I am establishment. Neither has a place within government.

Ok now we're getting somewhere

Wanting some kind of separation for the purpose of equality for those considered traditionally disadvantaged in society is something I can see some merit in. Where problems occur is when separation is wanted "because I don't believe in/agree with it".