›

Deadly attacks in Paris / Brussels / Nice (07/14/2016)

1…2728303233…48

Comments

  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I don't see a problem with people wanting to practice their religion in private. I'm not religious myself but if folks want to be religious then so be it. Religion seems to be a part of the 'human condition' all over the world.

    I had to do assembly prayer while schooling in England. I didn't mind it, because that's all it was. There was no 'preaching' or 'proselytizing' or anything like that.

    I draw the line at blatant disregard of facts (i.e. origin of the species etc.) and violence towards fellow living creatures (yes, not just humans, but all living beings) in the name of religious beliefs though. Common sense first, I would hope.

    In advanced societies, which have the privilege of education & where the rule of law is largely developed and stable, I would hope that religion should become less prevalent within the society in time. I also would hope that mechanisms are put in place to ensure that occurs slowly.

    My point is that secularism is a workable & necessary solution in advanced societies. However, one should also be wary of falling into other traps in these kind of societies, such as consumerism, as has been mentioned.

    What's wrong with practising religion in public?
    Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying to 'ban' public practice of religion. I am saying don't encourage it.

    The issue I have is more with the risk that it then becomes sanctioned (if subconsciously). 'My religion is superior to yours' etc. In my view, that's nonsense and shouldn't be countenanced, because all religions have flaws fundamentally.

    Ultimately, I am a believer in a secular society as the ideal, and a secular law should take precedence, with respect for all peaceful religions (in reality as well as under the law) imho.

    What is it about secular society that makes it the ideal for you? I'm a Christian, and the fact that Jesus died on the cross for my sin is fundamental to my beliefs. Every other religion denies this, so I cannot say anything but that they are fundamentally wrong. I believe that all those who don't trust in Jesus will go to hell, which is why I tell my friends and family about him. It's interesting to note that there are few atheists who have said that if Christians truly believe what they believe that it would be incredibly unloving of them not to tell people about their faith.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    edited March 2016 Posts: 1,731
    Simply put:

    John likes to wave his razor sharp 4 metre long chain above his head when he goes for a walk.
    His neighbor, Dave, frequently fears for his life because he is at risk of getting decapitated each time John passes him on the street.

    So who is impeding the others freedom in this case? Should Dave just cross the street thus avoiding John's manic chain swinging? No. John is impeding anothers freedom by exercising his ‘right’ to swing his chain. Thus, his chain antics must be ceased or done only within his own property.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I don't see a problem with people wanting to practice their religion in private. I'm not religious myself but if folks want to be religious then so be it. Religion seems to be a part of the 'human condition' all over the world.

    I had to do assembly prayer while schooling in England. I didn't mind it, because that's all it was. There was no 'preaching' or 'proselytizing' or anything like that.

    I draw the line at blatant disregard of facts (i.e. origin of the species etc.) and violence towards fellow living creatures (yes, not just humans, but all living beings) in the name of religious beliefs though. Common sense first, I would hope.

    In advanced societies, which have the privilege of education & where the rule of law is largely developed and stable, I would hope that religion should become less prevalent within the society in time. I also would hope that mechanisms are put in place to ensure that occurs slowly.

    My point is that secularism is a workable & necessary solution in advanced societies. However, one should also be wary of falling into other traps in these kind of societies, such as consumerism, as has been mentioned.

    What's wrong with practising religion in public?

    Nothing... As long as you don't impose it on others. And make it the practice for those of a different faith as yours or with no faith.

    There are these wonderful buildings called churches. They were build for worshippers to worship freely. Other religions have similar places too.
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    AceHole wrote: »
    Simply put:

    John likes to wave his razor sharp 4 metre long chain above his head when he goes for a walk.
    His neighbor, Dave, frequently fears for his life because he is at risk of getting decapitated each time John passes him on the street.

    So who is impeding the others freedom in this case? Should Dave just cross the street thus avoiding John's manic chain swinging? No. John is impeding anothers freedom by exercising his ‘right’ to swing his chain. Thus, his chain antics must be ceased or done only within his own property.

    Absolutely. But this allegory wouldn't work in my case - telling people about Jesus is offering them true life, rather than harming them.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    AceHole wrote: »
    Simply put:

    John likes to wave his razor sharp 4 metre long chain above his head when he goes for a walk.
    His neighbor, Dave, frequently fears for his life because he is at risk of getting decapitated each time John passes him on the street.

    So who is impeding the others freedom in this case? Should Dave just cross the street thus avoiding John's manic chain swinging? No. John is impeding anothers freedom by exercising his ‘right’ to swing his chain. Thus, his chain antics must be ceased or done only within his own property.

    Absolutely. But this allegory wouldn't work in my case - telling people about Jesus is offering them true life, rather than harming them.

    It would work fine - telling me about your faith or it's merit from your point of view does not pose any threat to my freedom. I say tell me all you like, bruv, have a ball. I might walk off out of disinterest, but that's about as hostile as it will get :D
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    AceHole wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    AceHole wrote: »
    Simply put:

    John likes to wave his razor sharp 4 metre long chain above his head when he goes for a walk.
    His neighbor, Dave, frequently fears for his life because he is at risk of getting decapitated each time John passes him on the street.

    So who is impeding the others freedom in this case? Should Dave just cross the street thus avoiding John's manic chain swinging? No. John is impeding anothers freedom by exercising his ‘right’ to swing his chain. Thus, his chain antics must be ceased or done only within his own property.

    Absolutely. But this allegory wouldn't work in my case - telling people about Jesus is offering them true life, rather than harming them.

    It would work fine - telling me about your faith or it's merit from your point of view does not pose any threat to my freedom. I say tell me all you like, bruv, have a ball. I might walk off out of disinterest, but that's about as hostile as it will get :D

    Excellent :)
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I don't see a problem with people wanting to practice their religion in private. I'm not religious myself but if folks want to be religious then so be it. Religion seems to be a part of the 'human condition' all over the world.

    I had to do assembly prayer while schooling in England. I didn't mind it, because that's all it was. There was no 'preaching' or 'proselytizing' or anything like that.

    I draw the line at blatant disregard of facts (i.e. origin of the species etc.) and violence towards fellow living creatures (yes, not just humans, but all living beings) in the name of religious beliefs though. Common sense first, I would hope.

    In advanced societies, which have the privilege of education & where the rule of law is largely developed and stable, I would hope that religion should become less prevalent within the society in time. I also would hope that mechanisms are put in place to ensure that occurs slowly.

    My point is that secularism is a workable & necessary solution in advanced societies. However, one should also be wary of falling into other traps in these kind of societies, such as consumerism, as has been mentioned.

    What's wrong with practising religion in public?
    Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying to 'ban' public practice of religion. I am saying don't encourage it.

    The issue I have is more with the risk that it then becomes sanctioned (if subconsciously). 'My religion is superior to yours' etc. In my view, that's nonsense and shouldn't be countenanced, because all religions have flaws fundamentally.

    Ultimately, I am a believer in a secular society as the ideal, and a secular law should take precedence, with respect for all peaceful religions (in reality as well as under the law) imho.

    What is it about secular society that makes it the ideal for you? I'm a Christian, and the fact that Jesus died on the cross for my sin is fundamental to my beliefs. Every other religion denies this, so I cannot say anything but that they are fundamentally wrong. I believe that all those who don't trust in Jesus will go to hell, which is why I tell my friends and family about him. It's interesting to note that there are few atheists who have said that if Christians truly believe what they believe that it would be incredibly unloving of them not to tell people about their faith.

    I wrote black on white that I don't think secular society is ideal. I say it's the best. Susceptible to be improved when required. I don't believe in perfect societies. Utopias are the dreams of fundamentalists and I'd have none of it.

    And that's why secular society is the best one: it can improve and it bases its values on reality and the treatment of our fellow primates on mutual respect and empathy. Not on how an hypothetical God would react based on his arbitrary rule.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2016 Posts: 23,883
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I don't see a problem with people wanting to practice their religion in private. I'm not religious myself but if folks want to be religious then so be it. Religion seems to be a part of the 'human condition' all over the world.

    I had to do assembly prayer while schooling in England. I didn't mind it, because that's all it was. There was no 'preaching' or 'proselytizing' or anything like that.

    I draw the line at blatant disregard of facts (i.e. origin of the species etc.) and violence towards fellow living creatures (yes, not just humans, but all living beings) in the name of religious beliefs though. Common sense first, I would hope.

    In advanced societies, which have the privilege of education & where the rule of law is largely developed and stable, I would hope that religion should become less prevalent within the society in time. I also would hope that mechanisms are put in place to ensure that occurs slowly.

    My point is that secularism is a workable & necessary solution in advanced societies. However, one should also be wary of falling into other traps in these kind of societies, such as consumerism, as has been mentioned.

    What's wrong with practising religion in public?
    Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying to 'ban' public practice of religion. I am saying don't encourage it.

    The issue I have is more with the risk that it then becomes sanctioned (if subconsciously). 'My religion is superior to yours' etc. In my view, that's nonsense and shouldn't be countenanced, because all religions have flaws fundamentally.

    Ultimately, I am a believer in a secular society as the ideal, and a secular law should take precedence, with respect for all peaceful religions (in reality as well as under the law) imho.

    What is it about secular society that makes it the ideal for you? I'm a Christian, and the fact that Jesus died on the cross for my sin is fundamental to my beliefs. Every other religion denies this, so I cannot say anything but that they are fundamentally wrong. I believe that all those who don't trust in Jesus will go to hell, which is why I tell my friends and family about him. It's interesting to note that there are few atheists who have said that if Christians truly believe what they believe that it would be incredibly unloving of them not to tell people about their faith.
    I obviously don't agree with your point of view on this matter, not being a practicing Christian, but I don't hold your beliefs against you. I don't think you're going anywhere different from me once it's all said and done with unless I see conclusive evidence to prove otherwise. Hopefully I can live my life with conviction, charity and kind heartedness, as well as with an open mind. I hope that the law looks at you and I with the same fairness. Ultimately, we're both human beings and I hope we make the most of our limited time here and do more good than harm.
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I don't see a problem with people wanting to practice their religion in private. I'm not religious myself but if folks want to be religious then so be it. Religion seems to be a part of the 'human condition' all over the world.

    I had to do assembly prayer while schooling in England. I didn't mind it, because that's all it was. There was no 'preaching' or 'proselytizing' or anything like that.

    I draw the line at blatant disregard of facts (i.e. origin of the species etc.) and violence towards fellow living creatures (yes, not just humans, but all living beings) in the name of religious beliefs though. Common sense first, I would hope.

    In advanced societies, which have the privilege of education & where the rule of law is largely developed and stable, I would hope that religion should become less prevalent within the society in time. I also would hope that mechanisms are put in place to ensure that occurs slowly.

    My point is that secularism is a workable & necessary solution in advanced societies. However, one should also be wary of falling into other traps in these kind of societies, such as consumerism, as has been mentioned.

    What's wrong with practising religion in public?
    Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying to 'ban' public practice of religion. I am saying don't encourage it.

    The issue I have is more with the risk that it then becomes sanctioned (if subconsciously). 'My religion is superior to yours' etc. In my view, that's nonsense and shouldn't be countenanced, because all religions have flaws fundamentally.

    Ultimately, I am a believer in a secular society as the ideal, and a secular law should take precedence, with respect for all peaceful religions (in reality as well as under the law) imho.

    What is it about secular society that makes it the ideal for you? I'm a Christian, and the fact that Jesus died on the cross for my sin is fundamental to my beliefs. Every other religion denies this, so I cannot say anything but that they are fundamentally wrong. I believe that all those who don't trust in Jesus will go to hell, which is why I tell my friends and family about him. It's interesting to note that there are few atheists who have said that if Christians truly believe what they believe that it would be incredibly unloving of them not to tell people about their faith.
    I obviously don't agree with your point of view on this matter, not being a practicing Christian, but I don't hold your beliefs against you. I don't think you're going anywhere different from me once it's all said and done with unless I see conclusive evidence to prove otherwise. Hopefully I can live my life with conviction, charity and kind heartedness, as well as with an open mind. I hope that the law looks at you and I with the same fairness. Ultimately, we're both human beings and I hope we make the most of our limited time here and do more good than harm.

    Thanks, I agree completely.

    I just question the notion of being a Christian in private, because it affects all aspects of my life private and public - i.e. I cannot be a Christian in private and then something else in public. 'Practising' as people call it cannot exist just in church on a Sunday if you're a Christian.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    After all that discussions I want to tell our Belgian members how sad this cruel attack has made the Swiss. There is a sense of resignation and grief. I feel and see this at work, with my friends and family.

    I don't know how it would make me feel, if my country would be attacked like this.
    I wish you can continue living your life without feeling your freedom has been compromised, and without fear.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    AceHole wrote: »
    Simply put:

    John likes to wave his razor sharp 4 metre long chain above his head when he goes for a walk.
    His neighbor, Dave, frequently fears for his life because he is at risk of getting decapitated each time John passes him on the street.

    So who is impeding the others freedom in this case? Should Dave just cross the street thus avoiding John's manic chain swinging? No. John is impeding anothers freedom by exercising his ‘right’ to swing his chain. Thus, his chain antics must be ceased or done only within his own property.

    Absolutely. But this allegory wouldn't work in my case - telling people about Jesus is offering them true life, rather than harming them.

    It's the 'truth' claim that I'm at odds with. If you've no rationale other than blind, dogmatic belief I can only take you as seriously as someone telling me that the meaning of life is '42'.

  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    Well you can preach all you want as long as you don't do it on working hours and using your position of authority (if you have one) to impose your faith.

    Regarding burning in hell for not believing in Jesus (or Mo, or Rael), I do have issues with it. Not only because it's unsupported by evidence, but because disbelief is no reason for punishment and worship as a criteria for reward is amoral, petty and unjust. And kinda rude.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2016 Posts: 23,883
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I don't see a problem with people wanting to practice their religion in private. I'm not religious myself but if folks want to be religious then so be it. Religion seems to be a part of the 'human condition' all over the world.

    I had to do assembly prayer while schooling in England. I didn't mind it, because that's all it was. There was no 'preaching' or 'proselytizing' or anything like that.

    I draw the line at blatant disregard of facts (i.e. origin of the species etc.) and violence towards fellow living creatures (yes, not just humans, but all living beings) in the name of religious beliefs though. Common sense first, I would hope.

    In advanced societies, which have the privilege of education & where the rule of law is largely developed and stable, I would hope that religion should become less prevalent within the society in time. I also would hope that mechanisms are put in place to ensure that occurs slowly.

    My point is that secularism is a workable & necessary solution in advanced societies. However, one should also be wary of falling into other traps in these kind of societies, such as consumerism, as has been mentioned.

    What's wrong with practising religion in public?
    Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying to 'ban' public practice of religion. I am saying don't encourage it.

    The issue I have is more with the risk that it then becomes sanctioned (if subconsciously). 'My religion is superior to yours' etc. In my view, that's nonsense and shouldn't be countenanced, because all religions have flaws fundamentally.

    Ultimately, I am a believer in a secular society as the ideal, and a secular law should take precedence, with respect for all peaceful religions (in reality as well as under the law) imho.

    What is it about secular society that makes it the ideal for you? I'm a Christian, and the fact that Jesus died on the cross for my sin is fundamental to my beliefs. Every other religion denies this, so I cannot say anything but that they are fundamentally wrong. I believe that all those who don't trust in Jesus will go to hell, which is why I tell my friends and family about him. It's interesting to note that there are few atheists who have said that if Christians truly believe what they believe that it would be incredibly unloving of them not to tell people about their faith.
    I obviously don't agree with your point of view on this matter, not being a practicing Christian, but I don't hold your beliefs against you. I don't think you're going anywhere different from me once it's all said and done with unless I see conclusive evidence to prove otherwise. Hopefully I can live my life with conviction, charity and kind heartedness, as well as with an open mind. I hope that the law looks at you and I with the same fairness. Ultimately, we're both human beings and I hope we make the most of our limited time here and do more good than harm.

    Thanks, I agree completely.

    I just question the notion of being a Christian in private, because it affects all aspects of my life private and public - i.e. I cannot be a Christian in private and then something else in public. 'Practising' as people call it cannot exist just in church on a Sunday if you're a Christian.
    I'm not asking you to be different in public and private. Of course I think you should be who you are. I think my concern (and that's all it is really) relates more to possibly sanctioning one religion over another if public practice is 'encouraged' rather than 'discouraged'. Inherently I believe a secular law should take precedence (in public and in private), and that the religious amongst us should firmly believe that too. Otherwise, I think we have a recipe for division rather than inclusion. A recipe for separation rather than integration. A recipe for potential misunderstandings.
  • FLeiterFLeiter
    Posts: 315
    I wonder what the original inhabitants of the Americas would call 'assimilation' by the white invaders from England, France and Germany? How about South Africa? Australia?

    The U.S.A. was founded on 'freedom FROM religion', hypocrits that we are-we choose to celebrate Christian holidays as national holidays and dismiss Jewish, Hindu and Islam holy days, as just another day. Maybe because we get more presents.
  • Scaramanga12Scaramanga12
    edited March 2016 Posts: 562
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    I believe that all those who don't trust in Jesus will go to hell, which is why I tell my friends and family about him.

    Haha what a lovely sentiment. How can you even bear to converse with the people on here when you believe most of them are condemned to such a dreadful fate?

    What about people who have had no exposure to Christianity and don't know about Jesus. A little rough on them, no?
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I don't see a problem with people wanting to practice their religion in private. I'm not religious myself but if folks want to be religious then so be it. Religion seems to be a part of the 'human condition' all over the world.

    I had to do assembly prayer while schooling in England. I didn't mind it, because that's all it was. There was no 'preaching' or 'proselytizing' or anything like that.

    I draw the line at blatant disregard of facts (i.e. origin of the species etc.) and violence towards fellow living creatures (yes, not just humans, but all living beings) in the name of religious beliefs though. Common sense first, I would hope.

    In advanced societies, which have the privilege of education & where the rule of law is largely developed and stable, I would hope that religion should become less prevalent within the society in time. I also would hope that mechanisms are put in place to ensure that occurs slowly.

    My point is that secularism is a workable & necessary solution in advanced societies. However, one should also be wary of falling into other traps in these kind of societies, such as consumerism, as has been mentioned.

    What's wrong with practising religion in public?
    Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying to 'ban' public practice of religion. I am saying don't encourage it.

    The issue I have is more with the risk that it then becomes sanctioned (if subconsciously). 'My religion is superior to yours' etc. In my view, that's nonsense and shouldn't be countenanced, because all religions have flaws fundamentally.

    Ultimately, I am a believer in a secular society as the ideal, and a secular law should take precedence, with respect for all peaceful religions (in reality as well as under the law) imho.

    What is it about secular society that makes it the ideal for you? I'm a Christian, and the fact that Jesus died on the cross for my sin is fundamental to my beliefs. Every other religion denies this, so I cannot say anything but that they are fundamentally wrong. I believe that all those who don't trust in Jesus will go to hell, which is why I tell my friends and family about him. It's interesting to note that there are few atheists who have said that if Christians truly believe what they believe that it would be incredibly unloving of them not to tell people about their faith.
    I obviously don't agree with your point of view on this matter, not being a practicing Christian, but I don't hold your beliefs against you. I don't think you're going anywhere different from me once it's all said and done with unless I see conclusive evidence to prove otherwise. Hopefully I can live my life with conviction, charity and kind heartedness, as well as with an open mind. I hope that the law looks at you and I with the same fairness. Ultimately, we're both human beings and I hope we make the most of our limited time here and do more good than harm.

    Thanks, I agree completely.

    I just question the notion of being a Christian in private, because it affects all aspects of my life private and public - i.e. I cannot be a Christian in private and then something else in public. 'Practising' as people call it cannot exist just in church on a Sunday if you're a Christian.
    I'm not asking you to be different in public and private. Of course I think you should be who you are. I think my concern (and that's all it is really) relates more to possibly sanctioning one religion over another if public practice is 'encouraged' rather than 'discouraged'. Inherently I believe a secular law should take precedence (in public and in private), and that the religious amongst us should firmly believe that too. Otherwise, I think we have a recipe for division rather than inclusion. A recipe for separation rather than integration. A recipe for potential misunderstandings.

    Wouldn't public practice encourage greater dialogue? I had some great conversations with some Muslim housemates during Ramadan.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I don't see a problem with people wanting to practice their religion in private. I'm not religious myself but if folks want to be religious then so be it. Religion seems to be a part of the 'human condition' all over the world.

    I had to do assembly prayer while schooling in England. I didn't mind it, because that's all it was. There was no 'preaching' or 'proselytizing' or anything like that.

    I draw the line at blatant disregard of facts (i.e. origin of the species etc.) and violence towards fellow living creatures (yes, not just humans, but all living beings) in the name of religious beliefs though. Common sense first, I would hope.

    In advanced societies, which have the privilege of education & where the rule of law is largely developed and stable, I would hope that religion should become less prevalent within the society in time. I also would hope that mechanisms are put in place to ensure that occurs slowly.

    My point is that secularism is a workable & necessary solution in advanced societies. However, one should also be wary of falling into other traps in these kind of societies, such as consumerism, as has been mentioned.

    What's wrong with practising religion in public?
    Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying to 'ban' public practice of religion. I am saying don't encourage it.

    The issue I have is more with the risk that it then becomes sanctioned (if subconsciously). 'My religion is superior to yours' etc. In my view, that's nonsense and shouldn't be countenanced, because all religions have flaws fundamentally.

    Ultimately, I am a believer in a secular society as the ideal, and a secular law should take precedence, with respect for all peaceful religions (in reality as well as under the law) imho.

    What is it about secular society that makes it the ideal for you? I'm a Christian, and the fact that Jesus died on the cross for my sin is fundamental to my beliefs. Every other religion denies this, so I cannot say anything but that they are fundamentally wrong. I believe that all those who don't trust in Jesus will go to hell, which is why I tell my friends and family about him. It's interesting to note that there are few atheists who have said that if Christians truly believe what they believe that it would be incredibly unloving of them not to tell people about their faith.
    I obviously don't agree with your point of view on this matter, not being a practicing Christian, but I don't hold your beliefs against you. I don't think you're going anywhere different from me once it's all said and done with unless I see conclusive evidence to prove otherwise. Hopefully I can live my life with conviction, charity and kind heartedness, as well as with an open mind. I hope that the law looks at you and I with the same fairness. Ultimately, we're both human beings and I hope we make the most of our limited time here and do more good than harm.

    Thanks, I agree completely.

    I just question the notion of being a Christian in private, because it affects all aspects of my life private and public - i.e. I cannot be a Christian in private and then something else in public. 'Practising' as people call it cannot exist just in church on a Sunday if you're a Christian.
    I'm not asking you to be different in public and private. Of course I think you should be who you are. I think my concern (and that's all it is really) relates more to possibly sanctioning one religion over another if public practice is 'encouraged' rather than 'discouraged'. Inherently I believe a secular law should take precedence (in public and in private), and that the religious amongst us should firmly believe that too. Otherwise, I think we have a recipe for division rather than inclusion. A recipe for separation rather than integration. A recipe for potential misunderstandings.

    Wouldn't public practice encourage greater dialogue? I had some great conversations with some Muslim housemates during Ramadan.
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I don't see a problem with people wanting to practice their religion in private. I'm not religious myself but if folks want to be religious then so be it. Religion seems to be a part of the 'human condition' all over the world.

    I had to do assembly prayer while schooling in England. I didn't mind it, because that's all it was. There was no 'preaching' or 'proselytizing' or anything like that.

    I draw the line at blatant disregard of facts (i.e. origin of the species etc.) and violence towards fellow living creatures (yes, not just humans, but all living beings) in the name of religious beliefs though. Common sense first, I would hope.

    In advanced societies, which have the privilege of education & where the rule of law is largely developed and stable, I would hope that religion should become less prevalent within the society in time. I also would hope that mechanisms are put in place to ensure that occurs slowly.

    My point is that secularism is a workable & necessary solution in advanced societies. However, one should also be wary of falling into other traps in these kind of societies, such as consumerism, as has been mentioned.

    What's wrong with practising religion in public?
    Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying to 'ban' public practice of religion. I am saying don't encourage it.

    The issue I have is more with the risk that it then becomes sanctioned (if subconsciously). 'My religion is superior to yours' etc. In my view, that's nonsense and shouldn't be countenanced, because all religions have flaws fundamentally.

    Ultimately, I am a believer in a secular society as the ideal, and a secular law should take precedence, with respect for all peaceful religions (in reality as well as under the law) imho.

    What is it about secular society that makes it the ideal for you? I'm a Christian, and the fact that Jesus died on the cross for my sin is fundamental to my beliefs. Every other religion denies this, so I cannot say anything but that they are fundamentally wrong. I believe that all those who don't trust in Jesus will go to hell, which is why I tell my friends and family about him. It's interesting to note that there are few atheists who have said that if Christians truly believe what they believe that it would be incredibly unloving of them not to tell people about their faith.
    I obviously don't agree with your point of view on this matter, not being a practicing Christian, but I don't hold your beliefs against you. I don't think you're going anywhere different from me once it's all said and done with unless I see conclusive evidence to prove otherwise. Hopefully I can live my life with conviction, charity and kind heartedness, as well as with an open mind. I hope that the law looks at you and I with the same fairness. Ultimately, we're both human beings and I hope we make the most of our limited time here and do more good than harm.

    Thanks, I agree completely.

    I just question the notion of being a Christian in private, because it affects all aspects of my life private and public - i.e. I cannot be a Christian in private and then something else in public. 'Practising' as people call it cannot exist just in church on a Sunday if you're a Christian.
    I'm not asking you to be different in public and private. Of course I think you should be who you are. I think my concern (and that's all it is really) relates more to possibly sanctioning one religion over another if public practice is 'encouraged' rather than 'discouraged'. Inherently I believe a secular law should take precedence (in public and in private), and that the religious amongst us should firmly believe that too. Otherwise, I think we have a recipe for division rather than inclusion. A recipe for separation rather than integration. A recipe for potential misunderstandings.

    Wouldn't public practice encourage greater dialogue? I had some great conversations with some Muslim housemates during Ramadan.

    Greater dialgoue about what? How I'll burn in hellfire? No thanks, I'd rather people kept that to themselves. It's tantamount to me having a 'great conversation' with a Connery fan, while having to remind them that not being a Moore fan will unfortunately see them condemned to eternal damnation. Load of old codswallop.
  • Scaramanga12Scaramanga12
    Posts: 562
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Wouldn't public practice encourage greater dialogue? I had some great conversations with some Muslim housemates during Ramadan.

    Yeah I bet you did.

    'you're going to hell mate'.

    'nah bruv, it is you who is going to hell inshallah'
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,615
    Hitchens (I make no apology for referencing him again) defined secularism as "I will not play with your toys", - a point perfectly made in the very short clip. We don't want to take your toys away but keep your toys at home. There are very very few religions that practice this:


  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    Scaramanga12 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Wouldn't public practice encourage greater dialogue? I had some great conversations with some Muslim housemates during Ramadan.

    Yeah I bet you did.

    'you're going to hell mate'.

    'nah bruv, it is you who is going to hell inshallah'

    I don't think that's quite how our conversations went ... More about the food they ate, and how we both agree that man is sinful ... I don't think hell was mentioned once actually ...
  • Scaramanga12Scaramanga12
    Posts: 562
    I would query how sincere such a conversation can be when you each believe the other is to spend eternity in hellfire. I mean, I don't even know how you can talk about such banal things, if that's what you truly believe.
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    edited March 2016 Posts: 4,325
    Scaramanga12 wrote: »
    I would query how sincere such a conversation can be when you each believe the other is to spend eternity in hellfire. I mean, I don't even know how you can talk about such banal things, if that's what you truly believe.

    Because we we are friends, that's what friends do. I believe I explained why they need to believe in Christ. I am friends with people who aren't Christians. And I want my friends to not go to hell.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2016 Posts: 23,883
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Wouldn't public practice encourage greater dialogue? I had some great conversations with some Muslim housemates during Ramadan.
    Perhaps you and your housemates are intelligent enough and wise enough to have such conversations in a calm manner, without misunderstanding.

    You said earlier that Christianity affects all aspects of your life. Essentially it is all encompassing. You also said that non believers are destined for hell. If you strongly believe such concepts, then doesn't that create some level of 'superiority' within you, even if subconsciously? How does that make you and I equal? Only the secular law affords me protection (even from Hell).

    Again, you may be able to have such conversations calmly, but I fear that other more religious (and perhaps not so smart) believers may not be able to. It is a fine line which could easily descend into distrust and then possibly violence, because some religious beliefs are held passionately & fervently, at the expense of common sense.

    Only a secular law protects all of us and each of us. It is essential in my view.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Scaramanga12 wrote: »
    I would query how sincere such a conversation can be when you each believe the other is to spend eternity in hellfire. I mean, I don't even know how you can talk about such banal things, if that's what you truly believe.

    Because we we are friends, that's what friends do. I believe I explained why they need to believe in Christ. I am friends with people who aren't Christians. And I want my friends to not go to hell.

    Why they need. They don't need to do anything.
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    edited March 2016 Posts: 4,325
    bondjames wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Wouldn't public practice encourage greater dialogue? I had some great conversations with some Muslim housemates during Ramadan.
    Perhaps you and your housemates are intelligent enough and wise enough to have such conversations in a calm manner, without misunderstanding.

    You said earlier that Christianity affects all aspects of your life. Essentially it is all encompassing. You also said that non believers are destined for hell. If you strongly believe such concepts, then doesn't that create some level of 'superiority' within you, even if subconsciously? How does that make you and I equal? Only the secular law affords me protection (even from Hell).

    Again, you may be able to have such conversations calmly, but I fear that other more religious (and perhaps not so smart) believers may no. It is a fine line which could easily descend into distrust and then possibly violence, because some religious beliefs are passionate and held fervently, at the expense of common sense.

    Only a secular law protects all of us and each of us. It is essential in my view.

    Excellent question. I guess I don't feel a sense of superiority because I and everyone deserve to go to hell because we have not lived with God in charge of our lives. It is Christ himself who is superior, that's why I boast in him and not myself. I have done nothing to deserve to go to heaven - not one iota.
  • patbpatb
    edited March 2016 Posts: 4,615
    It is very hard to have a calm discussion on these matters. When I attended an Alpha course, I was told as a matter of fact that my children (8 and 6 at the time) will burn in hell for eternity if they don't become christian. Considering the emotional connection I have with my two boys, its hard to "take that on the chin" and react calmly. This is what religion does, it makes threats. The most softly spoken religions are not all tea and cake. Threats, bribes and blackmail are part of their make-up.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    What kind of friend worship a being that can punish me for such petty reason? If someone tells me I'll burn in hell unless I worship whatever, that's not a friendly gesture. That's a threat.
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    patb wrote: »
    It is very hard to have a calm discussion on these matters. When I attended an Alpha course, I was told as a matter of fact that my children (8 and 6 at the time) will burn in hell for eternity if they don't become christian. Considering the emotional connection I have with my two boys, its hard to "take that on the chin" and react calmly. This is what religion does, it makes threats.

    I'm very sorry @patb that you had that experience. I can't speak for how that was put across to you, but it is true that those who don't believe that Christ has taken that punishment for them then yes they will go to hell. But isn't it amazing that Christ himself took that penalty? Even though I deserve to go to hell I won't. There is an amazing offer, a gift of mercy.
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    Ludovico wrote: »
    What kind of friend worship a being that can punish me for such petty reason? If someone tells me I'll burn in hell unless I worship whatever, that's not a friendly gesture. That's a threat.

    If God created you, doesn't he have the right to be worshipped? Not trying to argue, just a question to ponder.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    More like a threat from a mafia boss. And even if Jesus existed and died and resurrected (a lot of ifs) his sacrifice would hardly be one: one lousy afternoon then up in heaven then back on earth for a few days to impress a few people.

    Beside I don't think I deserve hell to begin with and reject completely the criterias to avoid it as amoral.
This discussion has been closed.