Respecting religion???

[jmorgan]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Yeah, religion aping what was before but then had Liz I and Maude/Matilda, Margaret etc. The higher born women of those times often wielded great power. Obviously peasants were peasants and did not count unless they upset the man in the church or the castle. Male or female. I understand the Vatican were a bit miffed when a women got the top job. Whether that tale is true or not, can't have that now can we, anyway.

I like to think we are crawling out of the days for the rest of us mere mortals and not just those born to it.

Religion can take note and try the same without kicking and screaming. I expect any religion trying to operate in the city as a business would be taken apart by several employment laws, but, well, you know, some bloke said a long time ago that we must separate the men and the women, lets keep it that way. Just in case. No matter which version of this particular god worship is followed.

[supertouring]

///ajd said:

Wow, the things you will tolerate to try and justify your own religion. Worth it at any any price eh?

Try taking a comfort blanket from a baby.

[Ardenconnel]

Just come to this topic today so looking at the original point rather than debates about religion itself.

I'm an evangelical christian, however I fail to see why people should feel obliged to respect my faith. Atheists are convinced I am wrong, so why would they respect what I believe? I certainly don't expect them to. Seems more consistent to me if they don't.

I'm big on freedom of speech however offensive that might be. If someone wants to mock me or my faith, that's their choice. If that offends me, so what? That doesn't mean that person should be silenced. The feeling I have is that the best way I can guarantee me having the freedom of thought and choice to live the life I want to (in my case following the Christian Gospel) is to allow others to do exactly the same (within reason obviously).

Once we lose freedom of speech/thought (as is beginning to happen in some respects, although we are still very free compared to many countries) it will be to the detriment to all of us.

[anonymous-user]

///ajd said:

Does that make it alright then?

Wow, the things you will tolerate to try and justify your own religion. Worth it at any any price eh?

Wut?

Not trying to justify anything about my own beliefs to you, I don't agree with enforced inequality, just a point that if you don't like the male domination of the religious organisations that this is also a thing about the whole of society and governance too, been that way since day one.
Now if we are talking about justifying opinions and beliefs how about you justify your opinion that FGM is somehow connected to the CofE and how you think all religions and religous people should be judged by the actions of IS.

[groucho]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I was listening to the JV show the other day. Some guy had been to Mosul to see what life was like under IS. He said that they had slaves as well. It seems we are going backwards.

[anonymous-user]

groucho said:

I was listening to the JV show the other day. Some guy had been to mosul to see what life was like under IS. He said that they had slaves as well. It seems we are going backwards.

THEY are going backwards.
Some people ( even religious people too) are fighting and often losing their lives to prevent them from taking more people with them.

[///ajd]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

It is simple, we were discussing the forced inequality in the CofE, and instead of agreeing it was wrong, pointed at other failures in the past to deflect away from criticism of the CofE. Why would you do this?

On the second point you are deliberately trying to mix up my points to try and undermine them. Why would you do this?

Instead of trying to deflect, why don't you discuss your views on the inequality promoted by the CofE?

My point is that no religion should escape the need to respect equality laws. Do you agree?

[///ajd]

Ardenconnel said:

Just come to this topic today so looking at the original point rather than debates about religion itself.

I'm an evangelical christian, however I fail to see why people should feel obliged to respect my faith. Atheists are convinced I am wrong, so why would they respect what I believe? I certainly don't expect them to. Seems more consistent to me if they don't.

I'm big on freedom of speech however offensive that might be. If someone wants to mock me or my faith, that's their choice. If that offends me, so what? That doesn't mean that person should be silenced. The feeling I have is that the best way I can guarantee me having the freedom of thought and choice to live the life I want to (in my case following the Christian Gospel) is to allow others to do exactly the same (within reason obviously).

Once we lose freedom of speech/thought (as is beginning to happen in some respects, although we are still very free compared to many countries) it will be to the detriment to all of us.

Do you think religions ability to not respect equality laws should be respected, or be subject to (i.e. second to) national law? In other words the ability of a church to discriminate against homosexuals should not be tolerated?

[Derek Smith]

A pope said:

"It is in no way lawful to demand, to defend or to grant unconditional freedom of thought, or speech, of writing, or of religion, as if they were so many rights that nature has given to man."

In essence = these freedoms should only be exercised by the church hierarchy.

Somewhat earlier:

Thomas Jefferson said:

Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have been advanced by not one inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect f coercion? To make one half of the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support error and roguery all over the earth.

In 1994, a cardinal, expecting the then current pope's promise with regards to the church's history to be honoured rather foolishly said:

some headstrong cardinal said:

How can one remain silent about the many forms of violence perpetrated in the name of the faith: wars of religion, tribunals of the inquisition and other form of violations of the rights of persons.

Perhaps he meant the well-known in the church abuse of children all over the world. He reckoned without another pope's order to keep quiet about it.

[anonymous-user]

///ajd said:

It is simple, we were discussing the forced inequality in the CofE, and instead of agreeing it was wrong, pointed at other failures in the past to deflect away from criticism of the CofE. Why would you do this?

On the second point you are deliberately trying to mix up my points to try and undermine them. Why would you do this?

Instead of trying to deflect, why don't you discuss your views on the inequality promoted by the CofE?

My point is that no religion should escape the need to respect equality laws. Do you agree?

I've never stated I agree with any enforced inequality, I gave my opinion on instances of inequality in the CofE at least twice. I answered your question way back about whether I would expect a company to be allowed to only accept men in the top jobs for example.
You responded to a discussion about the CofE with a reference to FGM, and when asked to explain why you did that you ducked the question.
You ask me about promoting the killing of non-believers and when asked why that was levelled at me you ducked the question again.
You link to a case about IS and try to use that against ALL religions. But you won't back it up when challenged. You just keep jumping about. I feel your opinions appear quite bigoted.

[///ajd]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

[anonymous-user]

1. Already answered.
2. No.
3. Lumping all religions and religious people together in order to blame them all for the actions of a few is a flawed way of thinking.

[///ajd]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

1. Can you remind us, I really can't find it.

2. So you think some religions discriminatory policies can be above the law - e.g. for sexism, etc.?

3. We'll have to disagree - of course I see the failure of religionists to see the ultimately human generated origins of all religions - and hence their failure to dismiss them all - as a flawed way of thinking. But of course if you believe in one, by definition you think that way.

[anonymous-user]

So if man decides to formulate a way of life that way of life should be dismissed because man formulated it? Errrrr, logic failure.

[///ajd]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Not quite my point - I consider all religion is man made and therefore there is no god in the sense of him existing outside a story that has been made up by man. This is itself is not a problem. If people want to believe in made up stuff, that is OK. It is where that belief starts to affect the human rights of others that I start to have a problem.

Remember, it is just my opinion. I understand you do not agree - how can you when possibly agree when (I think) you believe God actually exists? We will never agree on that point.

Can you repeat your views on how the CofE continues to promote inequality?

[Claudia Skies]

///ajd said:

Remember, it is just my opinion. I understand you do not agree - how can you when possibly agree when (I think) you believe God actually exists? We will never agree on that point.

If you develop the arguments correctly you will find it doesn't make a jot of difference whether god exists or not.

Take a really simple example. The miracle of "feeding the 5,000" with five loaves and two fishes. Given it's a miracle, why were the starting loaves and fishes needed at all? It's just nonsense.

[///ajd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08_NAED-3Tk

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Claudia Skies said:

Take a really simple example. The miracle of "feeding the 5,000" with five loaves and two fishes. Given it's a miracle, why were the starting loaves and fishes needed at all? It's just nonsense.

Because if he'd only had 4 loaves and 1 fish, he'd have run out of food. There's only so much your run of the mill miracles worker can do!

[Alex]

You rush a miracle man, you get rotten miracles.

[Pesty]

Alex said:

You rush a miracle man, you get rotten miracles.

Well he was mostly dead